"Without defeat in the war and pressure from Baku, Yerevan would hardly have moved from its place"
Russian analyst on Caliber.Az

INTERVIEWS  06 January 2024 - 10:49

Caliber.Az presents an interview with Lana Ravandi-Fadai, Candidate of Historical Sciences, Senior Researcher at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of Modern Oriental and African Studies at the Russian State University for the Humanities.

- How do you assess the level of Azerbaijani-Iranian relations in recent times? Can we talk about positive trends?

- Indeed, if we look at the history of Iranian-Azerbaijani relations in the last few decades, they have seen both periods of rise and activation, and periods of cooling. In some aspects, especially in the economy, contacts even went backwards for a long time. Thus, the trade turnover between the two countries decreased from $266 million in 1995 to $125 million in 2015. Only in recent years has it been possible to exceed the figure of 1995 (in January-October 2023, the trade turnover amounted to $ 95 million, but this figure is very small compared to the very large capabilities of the two countries).  The year 2023 became literally tragic for relations between the two countries when an employee of the Azerbaijani embassy in Tehran was shot dead in January (his killer was sentenced to death in October). However, in July, after the visit of Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian to Baku, relations began to improve, and several new high-level meetings took place. The meeting of Abdollahian and Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Jeyhun Bayramov on the sidelines of the summit of the Foreign Ministers of the Caspian littoral states in Moscow on December 6 was another impetus in the improvement of ties.

It seems to me that Iranian-Azerbaijani relations are now on the trajectory of sustainable warming. After all, both countries are interested in the completion of an extremely important project (the North-South International Transport Corridor), which will become a serious stimulus for the economic development of Iran and Azerbaijan. Therefore, I would not expect a new serious aggravation of relations in the coming months.

Another thing is that there are still many problems behind beautiful words about friendship and reconciliation and a certain distrust is still felt in the relations between the countries. For example, the problem of the full implementation of national and cultural rights of Iranian Azerbaijanis has not been solved, and on the other hand, Iran continues to be concerned about Azerbaijan's close ties with Israel. But in general, I would predict the dynamics of relations in

- What do you think is the role of the US in the Middle East and South Caucasus?

- It seems to me that the United States, unlike, for example, Russia, plays a clearly destructive role in the Middle East. It is enough to recall some of the recent mass crimes of American troops in the region, first of all, the destruction of the Syrian city of Raqqa literally to the ground in 2017: even according to American non-governmental organizations themselves, 85 per cent of houses in the city were destroyed, at least 1,600 civilians were killed, and three quarters of residents were forced to leave their homes. The main culprits of such a humanitarian disaster are American pilots who thoughtlessly dropped the most powerful bombs on the heads of citizens, as well as, to some extent, the Kurdish units - allies of the United States, who took the city on the ground. The very liberation of Raqqa from thug terrorists as a result of the actions of the United States and the Kurds is certainly a positive event. But, unfortunately, it was carried out by barbaric methods, so that the city itself, for which this operation was started, was wiped off the face of the earth. The United States has thus clearly shown how much they really value the lives of Syrians (American propaganda claims that the United States allegedly cares about the well-being of the Syrian people and for this purpose participates in solving the Syrian crisis).

The same clumsy, negative and adventuristic, in my opinion, is the US policy in general in the Middle East and the South Caucasus. If we take the example of Azerbaijan, it has liberated its territories that belong to it under international law (official Armenia, represented by Prime Minister Pashinyan, has also recognized that Karabakh is part of Azerbaijan), without allowing any mass crimes against the Armenians living there, as confirmed by international observers. Nevertheless, the Biden administration is clearly unhappy with the strengthening of Azerbaijan and is sharply reducing the level of relations with it by making unfounded accusations.

But as for Iran specifically, I would still note that the Biden administration, unlike the absolutely irreconcilable position of the Trump administration, is ready to make certain concessions and negotiate, which manifested itself, for example, in the transfer of $6 billion to Iran. which were frozen in US accounts, in exchange for the release of several hostages. However, we are talking only about the possible easing of sanctions and restrictive measures against Iran: Biden is absolutely not going to change his policy of full and unconditional patronage of all Israeli actions in the region, which causes the most discontent in Tehran, and by the way in many other Middle Eastern countries. Although he, being Israel's main ally, could well cool the ardor of Tel Aviv by asking to reduce the number of Israeli attacks on Gaza. But this, alas, does not happen.

- How can one interpret the policy of Yerevan, which pays lip service to allied relations with Tehran, but in fact expands the EU mission, which is engaged in espionage, including against Iran? At the same time, Yerevan has undertaken to actively cooperate with the US and France in the military sphere, which looks like a provocation against Tehran, which is against the emergence of external forces and players in the region....

- On the one hand, it should be noted that Armenia's policy in the region has become somewhat more compliant and more realistic compared to the period up to 2020. If before the Second Karabakh War, the Armenian leadership did not want to make any concessions on the Karabakh issue at all, then after the 44-day war and its surrender, as well as lengthy negotiations, Armenia still officially recognized the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, at least renounced claims contrary to international law. Although it is obvious that without the defeat in the war and the diplomatic pressure of Azerbaijan in the post-war period, Yerevan would hardly have moved from its place. Anyway, now Azerbaijan and Armenia are preparing for the official signing of a peace treaty that should settle the main disputed issues, and this inspires some optimism.

At the same time, there is still an obvious pro-Western drift on the part of Yerevan. As far as I understand, Armenia has begun to perceive France as its main ally and patron, and sometimes it even seems that Macron protects Armenia more than the Armenians themselves. Such a choice means intensive rapprochement with the European Union, which means an inevitable cooling of the former allied relations with Russia. All this cannot but cause discontent both in Moscow and in Baku. In particular, the official position of both Russia and Azerbaijan is that the expansion of the EU mission in Armenia will only increase tensions in the region. It is obvious that Tehran, although it sympathizes with Armenia much more than with Azerbaijan, is also wary of such the rapid activity of various Western missions and missions with unclear intentions near its borders. Therefore, in my opinion, such an ill-considered policy of Armenia will lead to negative results for itself in the first place. Not to mention Armenia's refusal to participate in transport projects, including those beneficial for its economy, such as the Zangezur corridor. Now, instead of Armenia, the corridor will pass through Iran.

- Apparently, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan are ready to build constructive relations with Afghanistan: Baku intends to open an embassy in Kabul this year, and Kazakhstan has taken the Taliban off the list of terrorist organizations. What does this indicate? Is the Taliban government on the threshold of its full legitimization, at least among the CIS countries?

- If we talk about Russia's position, Moscow is taking steps to establish relations with Afghanistan and does not hinder the development of relations with it from other states in the region. This is due to Russia's realistic approach towards the countries of the region in order to prevent the emergence of new problems and the exacerbation of old ones. Russia, in particular, provided humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people, for which it received gratitude from their Government. In addition, the current government of Afghanistan is strongly anti-American, which is of great importance to Russia in the context of a special military operation. Shortly, Moscow and Kabul plan to develop cooperation in the economy, energy and transport sectors. It seems to me that the role of Afghanistan will be determined primarily by the establishment of economic cooperation with the countries of the region. For this process to be successful, it must be accompanied by the restoration of this country ravaged by endless wars.

Why is Azerbaijan opening an embassy in Kabul? In my opinion, there is a logic here. Afghanistan is one of the poorest countries in the world, so there is a danger that the most distressed (in fact, starving) segments of society will switch to the side of terrorist and extremist organizations, primarily ISIS. The official Afghan army, NATO troops and Taliban formations fought against ISIS until 2021. After the fall of the Afghan army and the flight of many troops to Iran, after the withdrawal of NATO from the country, the Taliban, in fact, remained one-on-one with ISIS. The Taliban found themselves in a situation of lack of funds and blockade, therefore they need help and actual recognition. If their actual recognition is not carried out, with all the questions about them and the retrograde features of this movement, there is a huge risk of a significant part of Afghanistan falling into the hands of ISIS terrorists, who pose a much greater threat than the Taliban. Therefore, it is obvious that many states in the region, including the countries of the former USSR, are taking steps towards their actual recognition, recognizing the reality.

At the same time, I would like to emphasize that the opening of the Azerbaijani embassy in Kabul does not mean encouragement or support for the Taliban movement - almost no one has recognized the Taliban regime yet. The recognition of the Taliban and the opening of the embassy in Kabul should not be equated. Much in the tendency to establish contacts with Afghanistan is connected with the dynamics of the harmonious development of the Taliban regime's relations with the CIS countries and the world. The same motives in relations with Afghanistan are obviously dictated by the corresponding steps of Kazakhstan.

Caliber.Az