Kirill Krivosheev: Fundamental contradictions remain unresolved in Russia-Azerbaijan relations - INTERVIEW
Interview by News.Az with Russian South Caucasus expert Kirill Krivosheev
- How do you assess the normalisation process between Azerbaijan and Armenia?
- I assess the process as generally positive. The dialogue between experts (Farhad Mammadov, Areg Kochinyan and others) is certainly a good signal, and the launch of bilateral trade and transit is even more important.
However, sceptics still raise an argument that is difficult to refute: “This is all just Baku’s attempt to support Pashinyan in the elections.” One can disagree with this, but it is difficult to provide definitive proof either way. Ultimately, it comes down to trust (or mistrust) in Azerbaijan’s leadership. As you understand, such trust has not existed in Armenia for more than 30 years, and it could not suddenly emerge in just a couple of years.
- Parliamentary elections will soon take place in Armenia. What are your predictions for the results?
- All spring polling shows roughly the same picture: Nikol Pashinyan around 25%, Samvel Karapetyan around 12–15%, and Robert Kocharyan and Gagik Tsarukyan around 5–7%.
With such a distribution, the “multiplier effect” will clearly play a role (when parties that fail to cross the threshold transfer their votes to the winner — something similar exists in Türkiye as well). But I think it is clear that forming a viable opposition coalition is not realistic.
Pashinyan will likely win by a very small margin, largely due to low voter turnout. This typically happens when a significant part of the electorate feels such strong aversion toward all candidates that they simply do not vote. Such a situation actually benefits the authorities, as it reduces the potential opposition vote.
- Do you think Armenia will revise its constitution for the sake of peace, which the Pashinyan government has repeatedly stated it is ready to do?
- Pashinyan has repeatedly said that he will do this, and the further it goes, the more openly he speaks about it. He also understands that if he renounces these statements, it would effectively reset the peace agenda. Therefore, I think yes — this is a belief in a politician’s words, based on current circumstances.
- What can you say about the current level of Russia–Azerbaijan relations?
- I consider Russia–Azerbaijan relations to be complicated, as they always have been. They have never been simple, not even in the early 1990s. The two countries have consistently had unresolved contradictions on a range of issues, including South Caucasus policy, engagement with Iran, and Central Asia.
When presidents embrace on camera, one should not be misled — these fundamental contradictions remain unresolved. Russia would clearly prefer Azerbaijan not to develop a China–Europe logistics corridor bypassing Russian territory, even rhetorically.
Russia would also not want Azerbaijan to provide diplomatic or other support to Ukraine. It did not support Azerbaijan resolving the Karabakh issue by force. The ideal scenario from Moscow’s perspective would have been for Azerbaijan to remain a loyal and controllable partner, preferably with a Russian military presence on its territory. The last two presidents, Heydar Aliyev and Ilham Aliyev, worked to ensure Azerbaijan did not follow that path — and they succeeded.
The recent plane crash crisis should also not be forgotten. As you understand, it is not actually resolved yet. People remain in detention both in Russia and Azerbaijan. I am convinced that at least some of them are innocent. This is disgusting.
- Recently, a distorted map of Azerbaijan was displayed and the non-existent term “Nagorno-Karabakh” was used during the programme Time Will Tell on Russia's state-owned Channel One. How doyou comment on this?
- As you know, I am a “foreign agent” and will not defend Channel One’s editorial policy. However, my experience working in Russian media suggests this is more likely incompetence than a deliberate provocation, as some in Azerbaijan claim.
To discuss a topic, they needed a map. Should they draw a new one or use an existing one? Naturally, they used an existing one — it saves time. But to know that something on the map has changed, one already needs to be an expert on the region.
Similar news
