http://www.news.az/articles/14299
Wed 28 April 2010 | 06:18 GMT
News.Az interviews Eldar Zeynalov, director of the Azerbaijani Human Rights Centre.
This
region is plagued with instability; there has been tension in the
North Caucasus, including terrorist attacks and murders of high
ranking state officials over the past 20 years. Three conflicts -
Nagorno-Karabakh, South Ossetia and Abkhazia - are still unresolved.
Against this backdrop, the Winter Olympics will be held in Sochi in
2014. What is the likelihood of new threats and risks in the
region?
Well, it's madness to hold the Olympics near
such a centre of tension as Chechnya. In saying 'near', I don't mean
geographically, as it's not that close, but don't forget that
Chechens got to Budennovsk and armed Chechens came within 500 metres
of the Kremlin when they took hostages at the performance of Nord-Ost
at the Dubrovka theatre. Because of corruption in the law-enforcement
agencies, the militants can move unnoticed and such an event as the
Olympic Games may attract the attention of terrorists. They will try
to do something to achieve their political goals and attract
attention.
And let’s not
forget that this is a border with Georgia. I mean the internationally
recognized border, not Abkhazia. Once, before 1918, this territory
was part of Georgia, until either Denikin or someone else in the
White Army occupied Sochi. Since that time it has been considered
Russian territory and Georgia has recently recalled this. Moreover,
as soon as rumours emerged about Sochi’s chance of hosting the
Olympic Games, we saw some unpleasant incidents there, some
explosions on the beaches and so on. This is something of a hint and
the first signal.
Sochi is also a place for show business and
criminals. It is not a quiet spot in terms of security for the
competitors. I think a place could have been found well away from the
centres of tension. Sochi is near Abkhazia and Chechnya. I do not
know who suggested it, but whoever it was was extremely incautious. I
mean the international figures who voted for this.
You
mentioned Chechnya. Might the United States and the West try to
prevent the Olympic Games being held, since it is no secret that
Washington once did its utmost to bring about the collapse of the
USSR?
I don't think this is the same. Why? Because
whatever might be said about international organizations and others,
the world is balanced because of the agreement of the superpowers and
the Americans will never penetrate Russia, as they could be caught.
For example, there has not been a single case of an American or
American organization being caught in Chechnya supporting Chechens.
The Arabs support them and it's clear that the Arabs are quite
friendly towards America.
Nevertheless, America does not go
there, because it’s too risky. The geopolitical balance includes
such elements, as, for example, the communist government of Cuba, the
left-wing regime in Nicaragua, the unstable regime in Venezuela. As
soon as America makes a mistake somewhere, the strategic bombers
leave for Venezuela, Nicaragua recognizes the independence of
Abkhazia and so on. These are pro-Moscow steps. Therefore, no one
will try to hamper the Olympic Games. I don't think they will. It
could have been done at the stage when the venue for the games was
being selected.
What undercover steps may Moscow take
to ensure security at the Olympic Games?
I think
these will be steps taken for show, not undercover. Broad,
counter-terror operations will be conducted in the North Caucasus to
ensure the security of the participants in the Olympic Games. In
addition, as Sochi is at issue, it will be possible to justify such
operations and such pressure even beyond the scope of the Chechen
conflict. For example, laptops were confiscated from human rights
activists in Krasnodar because there was something Chechen there and
a criminal case was almost instituted against the human rights
activists beyond Chechnya.
Are changes to be expected
in the Karabakh, Abkhaz and Ossetian conflicts in connection with the
Olympic Games in Sochi in 2014?
Well, it's not worth
expecting any major changes in the Karabakh conflict until most of
the Caspian oil has been pumped out. Some major change in the balance
that would make the Americans get more involved in Caucasian affairs
is unlikely. And until then, there will be peace in Karabakh without
a single peacekeeper, no one will change the status quo and no one
will try to annex land or expand their territory.
As for Ossetia and Abkhazia, these tiny states are backed by a great superpower with a truncheon in his hand and whoever tries to use force will have to deal with Russia's Ivan. A similar situation could once be seen in Serbia. Until Russia gave up on Milosevic, no one could do anything to him. After his surrender, bombing started, there was American military pressure on Serbia, the opposition became bolder and took to the streets and something changed. It will be the same with Abkhazia and Ossetia. Until Russia surrenders them, nothing will change. Meanwhile, Russia is not interested in changing anything there. It feels at ease there and plans to have a reserve naval base in Abkhazia instead of one in Crimea, in Sevastopol. And if this plan goes ahead, Russia will never leave, just as the Americans do not leave Guantanamo.
Сохранилось в Викиликс:
https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/65/659700_russia-100428-.html
