Will the road from Aghdam to Kharabakh be opened, Internal squabbles in Karabakh, and what is France striving for?

In  appearance on the "Difficult Question" program, Vadim Dubnov, an esteemed Central Asia expert and columnist for Radio Liberty, dissected the escalating situation surrounding the "Lachyn Corridor" in Karabakh. With a perspicacious assessment, Dubnov outlined the confluence of factors that have contributed to the current political quagmire.

Dubnov contended that the growing intensity of the political landscape in Karabakh can be attributed to a cluster of interwoven dynamics. Firstly, he underscored a shared recognition that a climactic moment is on the horizon, coupled with a palpable uncertainty about the timeline leading to this denouement. This uncertainty, he mused, has catalyzed a sense of urgency among all involved parties.

A salient second factor, according to Dubnov, revolves around the stances assumed by key players. While Ruben Vardanyan and Samvel Babayan have seemingly solidified their positions, Dubnov noted that Araik Harutyunyan's reluctance to commit to a stance has introduced a palpable ripple in the unfolding narrative. Dubnov postulated that Harutyunyan's hesitancy might be attributed to his uniquely dependent position – his course of action is intertwined with the inclinations of Yerevan, Moscow, and Baku. This intricate web of dependencies, Dubnov argued, has restrained Harutyunyan from hasty decisions, inadvertently influencing the ongoing internal political tumult.

Anticipating the immediate future, Dubnov forecasted a forthcoming turn of events within approximately a week. He speculated that a new focal point, replete with renewed clarity and intrigue, will emerge, eclipsing the current quandary and shifting the narrative.

Dubnov drew attention to a recent mystery that caused a lot of speculation – Harutyunyan's demonstrative refusal to use the Aghdam road. This decision, despite his prior acknowledgment of the necessity for this passage for the Armenians of Karabakh, is, Dubnov suggested, emblematic of the immense political pressures in Yerevan and Karabakh. This event, he argued, underscores the pervasive interplay between the internal politics of Armenia and the tides of Karabakh.

Dubnov shed light on the prevailing tumult in Karabakh's leadership, characterized by the fierce race for the presidency and other leadership roles. However, Dubnov contended that this clamor might be a smokescreen of sorts, a ruse. The coveted positions within the Karabakh leadership, he argued, are currently bereft of the appeal that once accompanied them. In the post-war reality, Dubnov explained, the prestige of these roles has waned, rendering the high-stakes struggle for power potentially futile.

Turning his focus to the realm of international diplomacy, Dubnov directed attention to Paris' intriguing maneuvers, deliberately kindling a diplomatic spat with Azerbaijan. He discerned Paris' intention to assert a modicum of autonomy from the larger EU narrative, positioning itself as a distinct locus of power. This positioning, he inferred, is influenced by a broader global agenda that transcends the intricacies of Karabakh, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. Simultaneously, Dubnov acknowledged a certain historic bias favoring Armenia in Paris' approach, attributing this to a longstanding pattern.

In sum, Dubnov's expert analysis offered a multifaceted exploration of the complex web of factors shaping the Karabakh narrative, providing a glimpse into the intricate interplay between regional politics and international maneuvering.