War… War. War! War?

There is a further point to be made is that delicate analysts point out that the war is advantageous for third party uninvolved in the war (i.е. not directly involved). In considering that this circumstance is in line with the actual state of things, it’d be appropriate to identify a candidate for the «third party» and reveal interests of this unusual contest.

Judging by the degree of involvement, the most active candidates (by word of mouth or in deed) are Russia and Turkey. Disquieting is Moscow’s pause which is fraught with unpredictable consequences. True, not exactly this way: Russian mass media are engaged in disseminating various schemes of stop to war. Thus, political eccentric V. Zhirinovsky suggests to integrate Nagorno Karabakh into Russia followed by Azerbaijan and Armenia. Other scenarios offer to get limited by landing «a peace-making troop» in the conflict area, according to Dmitry Zhuravlev, a director general of the Institute of Regional Problems. Note that Zhuravlev opines that these must Russian peace-makers  wih OSCE mandate.

At one with him is a military expert and editor of «Arsenal Otechestva» magazine Alexey Leonov who claims that Azerbaijan pursues an aim to liberate territories from Armenians to the detriment of all Genève Conventions. For this reason, Russia must intensify efforts aimed at peace enforcement operations.

In turn, military experts of the Academy of Geostrategic Problems believe that if Armenia is faced with resounding defeat, Russia should take the part of Armenia. Proceeding from experience of previous wars, they stress that Azerbaijan with its high military potential is underdog to Armenia in operative-tactical, strategic training of commanders and moral-psychological potential. This notwithstanding, he protracted war and the war of resources are against Armenia.

It should be noted that this prognosis was provided in July and denied a large-scale war that started in September.

The list of all proposals is endless; however, most of them are formulated within the framework of «traditional interests of Russia in Transcaucasia».

From prospects cited above, director of the Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service, Sergey Naryshkin declared that militants from terror organizations «Jabhat an-Nusra», «Firkat Hamza», «Sultan Murad» and extremist Kurdish organizations are making their way to the region. However, Naryshkin gave little guidance on whose side were militants and who paid for their services. He noted that «we are anxious that Transcaucasia might turn into new stepping stones for international terror organizations aiming to invade states contiguous to Azerbaijan and Armenia, including Russia». In his words, the point is about «thousands of radicals» going to join combat operations.

But what about public opinion? What are views of ordinary citizens on the possibility of war?

Thus, Russian business daily «Vzglyad» held an opinion poll with the theme «Whom should Russia support today?» attended by 48,737 citizens. Note tha the newspaper (editor Anton Vayno) is issued by «Expert institute of social studies» under the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation.

The results are as follows: Azerbaijan - 22,12%; Armenia – 19,64%; , «none of the parties» – 58,24%. What is important to notice is that, most probably, votes for Baku and Yerevan go back Caucasians residing or working in Russia. But how else can be explained an impressive number of Russian «isolationists»? Note that over the past two years the propaganda has evangelized Russo-phobic nature of the new Armenian authorities stepping after «dissenting» Georgia. Note that at present «the trill of nightingales» ring hollow for Azerbaijan ear: Pashinyan is eager to get not so much Russia as the USA into the conflict. As a whole, for some time past Yerevan has been sliding westwards.

It should be borne in mind that single-eyed like-minded persons of yesterday’s diviners are prone to claim that if Russia supported Armenia it would lose a faithful and stable partner in the person of Azerbaijan. True, official Kiev ruined the enjoyment after it demanded from Armenia to observe the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan.

It ought to be noted that the Russian source «Meduza» believes that the Russian stand on the issue is ambivalent. Suffice it to remind that Moscow is bound with Yerevan within the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) framework and simultaneously a chief mediator over Karabakh conflict settlement. Note that the primary objective of these duties is the preservation of status quo acceptable for Armenia and unacceptable to Azerbaijan; the latter maintains good relations with Russia. «All these impose certain constraints on the conflict development. Armenia can, without hindrance, store up strength to help Nagorno Karabakh while Azerbaijan (and its ally Turkey) cannot prevent it» (Meduza, 29.09.20).

As viewed by this information source, Turkey is making its own multifaceted play embracing issues of the Near East and South Caucasus and follow-up projects of Turkic-speaking states of Central Asia. These targets include superseding Russia as a chief partner of Azerbaijan; providing security of oil, gas and communication routes to thus reduce its dependence upon Russian energy supplies; placing the Karabakh conflict (along with Syrian and Libyan ones) on the agenda of the Russian-Turkish military-strategic relations.

In turn, senior fellow at the Center of Caucasus and Regional Security under the Moscow State University of International Relations, Vadim Mukhanov opines that «there is no more talk about spontaneity and helter-skelter of fighting», for the point is about preplanned operation. In his words, if the conflict is not stopped under serious external pressure, it will spell disaster to affect North Caucasus and all big actors, including Russia and Turkey. In this respect, Russia maintaining good relations both with Yerevan and Baku and backed by other international actors should get the parties to the conflict to the conference table.

What is there to talk about between leaders of Azerbaijan and Armenia after what has happened? It has to be kept in mind that President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev describes the Russian stand on the conflict as «positive» and «soft» where Russia is acting as «a great and responsible country». To stop military operations, the Azerbaijani party puts forward a demand to submit an Armenian occupation troop pullout schedule warranted internationally. Nikol Pashinyan would like to stop military operations without any preliminary conditions; instead he is engaged in delivering orders to strike against towns of Azerbaijan; toughens the rhetoric. Absolutely unpersuasive are allegations that in reply to bombing «the army of breakaway Nagorno Karabakh Republic began crashing «pivotal military infrastructures deep behind enemy lines».

There is immediate evidence that missiles against Azerbaijan were launched from the Armenian territory.

As for a new rhetoric of the Armenian Prime Minister, it became apparent in an interview to the German newspaper Bild. «Nagorno Karabakh and Armenia are front line separating the two civilizations. Armenians of South Caucasus are the final hurdles on the path of Turkish north-, east- and south-eastwards expansion. The point is that Turkey is seeking to recreate the old Empire. If the world community fails to realize the geopolitical importance of the current developments, Europe will have to come to terms with the fact that in the not-too-distant future Turkey will get within sight of Vienna». Beyond any doubts, accepting these alarmist statements in good faith the West is well-informed about the true situation turning it to its own advantage.

Of interest is the fact NATO Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg called Turkey as a member of the alliance «to use its influence for reducing tensions».

An impression is that particular initiatives are expected to be advanced from external conflicting forces. The reason is both successes of the Azerbaijani army and apocalyptic consequences of these actions.

Ali Abasov