The Caspian Post presents an interview with Eugene Chausovsky, a senior analyst at the Newlines Institute.
- After Azerbaijan"s military operations in 2020 and 2023, the region seems closer than ever to a peace treaty between Armenia and Azerbaijan. However, achieving this goal remains challenging. What are the main obstacles to peace?
- The obstacles to peace exist on both internal and external levels. Internally, Armenia and Azerbaijan must resolve several issues, including border delimitation and constitutional changes. While progress has been made, significant hurdles remain, such as security guarantees for Armenia and resistance from domestic opposition.
Externally, actors like Russia and Iran complicate matters. Russia, in particular, has little interest in seeing a peace agreement that could enhance economic and diplomatic integration across the region, thereby reducing its influence. Despite these challenges, the progress achieved so far is encouraging. A peace treaty would not only benefit Armenia and Azerbaijan but also foster stability and economic opportunities for the broader region.
- Georgia has also been a focus of international attention recently. With widespread protests over the government"s stance on EU accession, do you think early elections are inevitable?
- Georgia"s situation is indeed precarious. The protests stem from public dissatisfaction with the government"s perceived anti-Western stance, particularly its decision to freeze EU accession talks. These protests echo movements seen in other regional countries like Ukraine and Moldova, where public opposition to government decisions led to significant instability.
The Georgian Dream government faces a difficult decision. Calling early elections could backfire, given the opposition"s growing momentum. On the other hand, ignoring public discontent risks further escalation. The coming weeks will be critical in determining the country"s trajectory.
- There have been claims that Tahrir al-Sham obtained documents revealing secret ties between the Assad regime and Israel against Iran. Iranian journalist Haid al-Nuazi also alleges that Syria provided Israel with intelligence on high-ranking Iranian officials. How credible are these claims, and could there really be an alliance between Israel and Syria against Iran?
- While I cannot verify the specifics of these allegations, the dynamics in the region are undeniably complex. From Israel"s perspective, Syria under Assad represented a dual challenge-hosting Iranian military forces and acting as a conduit for arms to Hezbollah in Lebanon. However, Assad"s longstanding leadership also made him a predictable actor for Israel.
If there are areas where Israeli and Syrian interests align, particularly against Iranian influence, tactical cooperation could be plausible. However, this would likely remain opportunistic rather than indicative of a formal alliance. Israel"s ongoing preemptive strikes in Syria highlight its concerns about the uncertainty surrounding the country"s future leadership.
- Syria has also been in the spotlight recently. With the fall of Bashar al-Assad"s regime, the country is at a historical turning point. What scenarios do you foresee for Syria"s future?
- Syria is currently in a very fluid and unpredictable state, making it challenging to forecast its future. Internally, an interim government is being established, with figures like Al-Jolani taking prominent roles. However, unresolved issues such as territorial control and military governance continue to pose significant challenges.
Externally, key players like Russia and Iran, who supported Assad, are striving to retain influence despite facing strategic setbacks. Russia, for example, is eager to maintain its naval and air bases, while Iran is working to build alliances with the emerging administration. Turkey has gained strategic advantages, and Israel continues its proactive approach to safeguard its interests, such as maintaining a buffer zone in the Golan Heights.
Meanwhile, the US and European countries are cautiously monitoring developments, aiming to prevent further instability or the resurgence of extremist groups. Syria"s trajectory will largely depend on the interplay of these internal and external dynamics.
-During his campaign, President-elect Donald Trump claimed he could end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours. How realistic is this claim, and can we expect a resolution, if not within 24 hours, at least in the short term?
- Ending the war in Ukraine will undoubtedly be a priority for the incoming Trump administration. However, resolving such a complex conflict in such a short time frame is highly optimistic and, frankly, improbable. That said, we may see early efforts toward a ceasefire or negotiations next year. President-elect Trump has already begun discussions, meeting with key figures such as Ukrainian President Zelensky and French President Macron.
For Ukraine, the main concern remains securing safety guarantees, ideally through NATO membership, which continues to be a contentious issue. While skepticism about a swift resolution persists, it is clear that the Trump administration is determined to prioritize diplomatic efforts.
