How interested is Russia really in peace between Azerbaijan, Armenia? One concerning remark after another

The statement by Denis Gonchar, Director of the Fourth Department of CIS countries of the Russian Foreign Ministry, was not just expected, but practically inevitable. It is a logical consequence of Russia's strategy concerning the entire South Caucasus. Its essence is to keep the region under its control by any means, including disrupting any peace initiatives, unless they come from Moscow.

To be fair, the South Caucasus is a region that affects the whole of Eurasia, with all its rich resources and human potential. It is here that many gas and oil pipelines and transport routes pass, through which hydrocarbons and many other various goods are delivered to Europe. Therefore, control over the South Caucasus is strategically important not only for Russia but also for any world player.

Nevertheless, Gonchar's remark that "an attempt to hastily conclude a peace treaty between Azerbaijan and Armenia to the detriment of quality and proper preparation will result in new conflicts in the future" is truly shocking.

Firstly, why hastily? The conflict between the two republics lasted for thirty years. It could have been nipped in the bud, but the leadership of the then USSR did not deign to do so, preferring to manage the situation rather than eliminate the causes that contributed to its emergence.

By the way, after the collapse of the USSR, the Russian Federation also had the opportunity to stop the war. All it had to do was to follow international law, preventing Armenia from realising its territorial claims to Azerbaijan.

Moscow had every opportunity to do so. But, again, this did not happen. On the contrary, Russian soldiers and officers fought on the side of Armenia during the First Karabakh War. Some of them were even captured by the Azerbaijani military and confessed that they went to kill Azerbaijanis for money.

There were also revelations by Russian TV journalist Alexander Nevzorov in this regard. He noted that Pskov paratroopers fought on the side of the Armenians - for money, of course, but with incredible cruelty. And we also, of course, remember about the 366th Motorised Rifle Regiment, which took part in the extermination of the peaceful Azerbaijani population in Khojaly. The Russian officers and soldiers who committed this heinous crime stood side by side with Armenian thugs at that time.

And after the First Karabakh War, Armenia was actively pumped with Russian weapons. For example, on April 2, 1997, at a closed session of the State Duma, Lt Gen Lev Rokhlin made a report on the situation in the South Caucasus and touched upon the problem of illegal arms transfers by Russia to some neighbouring CIS states.

He noted that Armenia received new weapons, but according to the documents everything was written off at the price of scrap metal. Rokhlin then stated what Azerbaijan had been shouting for years: Russia was arming one of the parties to the conflict, thus fuelling an even bigger fire in the South Caucasus.

According to the data available to Rokhlin at the time of his report to the State Duma, Russia's financial losses as a result of the supplies to Armenia totalled about $1 billion. Even though the Azerbaijani authorities repeatedly informed Moscow of their concern about the growing number of Russian arms deliveries to Armenia, Russia's top government and military leaders were remarkably indifferent.

So, if Denis Gonchar thinks that Azerbaijan has forgotten about all this, he is very much mistaken. We also remember that Russia, being a co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, did everything to freeze the Karabakh conflict as much as possible to have a lever of pressure on both Baku and Yerevan. And the current careless remark of the Russian diplomat about the attempt to "hastily conclude a peace treaty" is an obvious manipulation to exert some pressure on Azerbaijan.

At the same time, Gonchar's nervousness is alarming when he says that “The west periodically makes statements that Baku and Yerevan will be able to sign a peace treaty almost in the coming weeks and months". What is wrong with that if Russia, as Russian diplomats claim, is also interested in establishing peace in the region? The sooner a peace treaty is concluded between Baku and Yerevan, the sooner the processes of peaceful coexistence of the Armenian and Azerbaijani peoples will begin.

It seems that Russia doesn’t want this at all, that its main goal is to monopolise the process of settlement of Armenian-Azerbaijani relations.

And this is not mere idle talk at all, because we have faced the same reaction from the Russian Federation to the mediation efforts of other countries and organisations before.

In particular, Russian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Maria Zakharova has already declared the West's mediation in the negotiations between Azerbaijan and Armenia "destructive". “

There were no constructive and real results in terms of progress in the meetings held, as the West claims. That is, you can say whatever you want, but in practice, it does not happen," she said some time ago.

And now we see how Zakharova’s colleague is openly concerned that Baku and Yerevan will be able to sign a peace treaty "almost in the coming weeks and months". And all this is taking place against the backdrop of rapid activity in Khankandi of Moscow's emissary - Russian-Armenian oligarch Ruben Vardanyan, who is openly organising provocations against Azerbaijan, trying to set the region on fire again.

All this suggests that Russia will do anything to prevent the signing of a peace treaty between Azerbaijan and Armenia. This is not a position that can be accepted in Baku. Nor, I suspect, in Yerevan.