Independent political analyst, Rahim Rahimov gave next  exclusive interview to Eurasia Diary portal concerning the Armenian-Azerbaijan conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh. He touched upon important issues in his interview on Russia's recent role in the negotiations, the possibility of replacing the OSCE Minsk Group and the further activity of the civil societies of both countries in the solution of the conflict. 

Rahim Rahimov is contributing analyst for Eurasia Daily Monitor and the Kennan Institute.

- Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that Russia and other co-chairs of OSCE Minsk Group are working on the resumption of the negotiations on the settlement of Nagorno-Karabakh conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan. What do you think, is Moscow really interested in taking measures to resume negotiations between Armenian and Azerbaijani leaders?

- Moscow is interested in the resumption of negotiations because it reduces the risk of major escalation that could grow into a war, and increases the likelihood of maintaining the status-quo. Yet the status-quo doesn’t hurt the interests of Russia. And as the practice of last 26 years has indicated, the negotiations serve to maintain the status-quo not make a breakthrough let alone change it.

- Numbers of experts, both local and external, consider that OSCE Minsk Group failed and it needs to be replaced with another diplomatic structure, which could make both sides come the agreement on the peaceful solution to the conflict. Do you assume the possibility for the establishment of new diplomatic structure on the promotion of the negotiations for the solution of the long-term Armenia-Azerbaijan conflict?

- The problem here is not the structure or the current OSCE Minsk Group format of negotiations. Hypothetically even the Minsk Group is replaced with another one, the essence would persist: major powers and mediators will stay in place, so are their interests and positions. The actual problem is, at least from Azerbaijan’s perspective, while the mediators are expected to explicitly formulate on what concrete principles in the resolution of conflict are to be settled, those mediators leave this issue to Armenia and Azerbaijan. Therefore, instead of seeking to replace or restructure the OSCE Minsk Group, Baku and Yerevan need to diplomatically engage with each other directly.

- Do you think that the second Astana format, consisting of Russia, Turkey and Iran, would be alternative to the OSCE Minsk Group?

- The so-called second Astana format may have been relevant during the active phase of the war over 1991-94. But the time and momentum for that has gone long ago. Yet there is a kind of consensus between Russia, US and Europe on Karabakh conflict. None of them has a vested interest in changing that. And Iran also is not bothered by that.  Only Turkey can favour that. But for sure that will be blocked by Armenia, who wouldn't agree to that format replacing the OSCE Minsk Group. After all, as I noted above, the problem is not the format.

- How is it possible to make conditions for the representatives of Armenian and Azerbaijani civil societies to further involve in the discussion of matters on peace and confidence-building measures?

- It is either irrelevant or premature at this point without direct diplomatic engagement between Baku and Yerevan. In particular, for Baku it is not very promising and would serve the longevity of the status-quo. On top of that, the 26-year cease-fire in itself could be regarded a clear confidence-building measure.

by Yunis Abdullayev