Dugin: Eurasianism is much broader than the model that is now being implemented


Alexander Dugin

On the relations between Azerbaijan and Russia, as well as the settlement of the Karabakh conflict and relations between Turkey and Russia, Russian public figure, philosopher, political scientist, sociologist Alexander Dugin told in his exclusive interview with yenicag.yu.

-How do you assess your visit to Baku, and how would you assess the Russian-Azerbaijani relations in today’s geopolitical conditions?

-I was in Baku in the early 2000s. Today it’s a completely different city. He became more beautiful, he blossomed. I am in the capital of that state, which can be considered an established state. In political science there is such a thing as a “failed state” – Azerbaijan is the complete opposite and is a successful state. This is the first impression. As for the Russian-Azerbaijani relations, they are now on the rise. This is not a peak, but this is a move towards it, as they are getting better and better every year. A very strong and important gesture was made by Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev when he refused to participate in the EU Eastern Partnership program. I see his active attempts at rapprochement with Russia. Azerbaijan has recently ceased to play the role of the periphery of several states such as: Russia, Iran, Turkey or the West, but becomes a regional leader. Because many initiatives of Baku are even ahead of what is now being implemented between Russia and Turkey and Russia and Iran. That eats the role of Baku as an independent geopolitical player is steadily increasing. Probably, this affects the general condition of the city, the people and the political elite. I believe that now is the time to enter a new stage in Russian-Azerbaijani relations. The role of Russia in the settlement of the Karabakh conflict, in particular the return of at least 5 of the 7 districts to Azerbaijan will be a key topic. We are practically approaching this, and accordingly all barriers that prevent closer cooperation in a number of transnational alliances will be destroyed and eliminated.

-Do you mean the Eurasian Union?

-Yes, it can be the Eurasian Union or there may be other initiatives, because, as a theorist, I see the current Eurasian Union as a distorted embodiment of my ideas. Because the Eurasian Union must be created on the basis of civilizational unity and idea, and not on the basis of pragmatic interests. Therefore, I am not very enthusiastic about the Eurasian Union, but it is important to move in this direction. Eurasianism is much broader than the model that is now being implemented. I think that Russia and Azerbaijan have many formats and if everything goes according to the format by which bilateral relations are developing now, then we will have even greater rapprochement and, accordingly, even greater increase in the geopolitical status of Azerbaijan in the region, and strengthening of sovereignty. By the way, I formulated the following principle: the guarantor of the territorial integrity of each post-Soviet state is relations with Russia. When a given post-Soviet state has good relations with Russia, the territorial integrity of the state is established when the relations are bad – it is violated. Not because Russia is destroying, but because the states themselves, having entered into a conflict with Russia, can not maintain territorial integrity. Therefore, the key to the preservation of Azerbaijan’s sovereignty is the pledge of the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, including the administrative territorial integrity, the recognition of Karabakh as part of Azerbaijan by Russia. Those countries that challenge Russia, their territorial integrity have already been violated, Georgia, Ukraine, Moldova. Most importantly, this wording applies not only to relations with post-Soviet states, but also in the history of relations with Turkey. We then approached closely that the territorial integrity of Turkey was in jeopardy and only good relations with Russia are able to prevent this threat for Turkey. Those who maintain normal, neutral, good relations with Russia, the challenges of their territorial integrity are less terrible and vice versa. In this regard, Aliyev’s wisdom is that he follows the behests of his father who, in his political will, conveyed the most important idea that the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Azerbaijan directly depends on good relations with Russia. If Azerbaijan has good relations with Russia, it will be more free from regional powers. Thus, it will turn from the periphery, where a geopolitical clash takes place, pulling Azerbaijan apart. Iran has its own view, Turkey has its own, Russia has its own, and strengthening relations with Russia is a guarantee of strengthening the sovereignty of Azerbaijan. This was once well understood by Nazarbayev and therefore Kazakhstan is a vivid example of the state in the post-Soviet space. And Ilham Heydarovich is following this path.

-You noted about the entry of Karabakh into Azerbaijan, provided good relations between Baku and Moscow. How do you see this?

-In terms of Russia, Karabakh is a part of Azerbaijan. This is a very complicated process and any attempt at a straightforward solution to this conflict will only lead to a worsening of the situation from all sides, since its strength and blood can not be solved, then the issue of transferring the five regions to Azerbaijan, which are not populated and deserted, but are huge Which could accommodate a huge number of people who lived there and left their homes. This issue is considered in the nearest agenda and the transfer of these five regions is the most important “plan of Lavrov”. Our group also put its hand to this plan and I personally discussed this plan with Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu, and this issue is not about Karabakh and this issue is today in Russian-Azerbaijani-Armenian diplomacy, with full agreement with this project of Turkey and Iran. All regional players are interested in this, except the West, which any peacekeeping efforts in the region will sabotage. As soon as we understand this and develop a plan to counteract these plans of the West, the situation will develop rapidly. The second stage can begin at a later time, as this requires more detailed discussion. It is very important to understand that Karabakh is Azerbaijani, as long as Russia recognizes it. While Moscow recognizes the territorial integrity of Azerbaijan, including Karabakh, it will be so. This is very important, and no matter who controlled Karabakh, while Russia recognizes it as part of Azerbaijan, it will be so. In the post-Soviet space, the most important thing is what Russia recognizes.

-Today the meeting between Vladimir Putin and Rajab Tayyib Erdogan should take place. How do you assess the upcoming meeting, and what will it give to the two-way relationship? On the other hand, this is Erdogan’s first visit to Russia after the referendum, what do you think of the referendum in Turkey as a whole?

-I am very much interested in Turkish politics, and I maintain relations with the leadership of Turkey at different stages. At a critical period of aggravation of the situation in Turkey, we played a key role and conveyed information about the participation of the Gyulyan sect that they shot down our plane in Syria. To other circles of Russia there was no confidence in Turkey and we managed to play an important role in unblocking the conflict. I know the situation in Turkey from the inside. Erdogan could initially go in three ways: Islamism, liberalism and rapprochement with the West, and could go through Eurasianism. In the beginning, he went on two wrong ways, and reached a dead end in the path of Islam, just reaching the support of some groups in Syria, he reached a dead end in European integration, and his last move was to turn to Eurasianism, which he did, because he pragmatist. I welcome this his Eurasian turn. The rapprochement with Russia and military-strategic cooperation, which is currently developing rapidly between Russia and Turkey, is also part of this Eurasian project. In principle, after trying all the ways, and when his Americans tried to throw him off power, he realized that he had no other option. Nevertheless, he sincerely walked to the end, while the Americans did not try to carry out a coup by the hands of the Gyulists. Erdogan is a strong politician and learns from his mistakes. The referendum was ambiguous from the very beginning. On the one hand, the Russian people are a monarchical people, and for us the subject is our head of state, and it was clear to us what Erdoğan wants to do. He wanted to increase his authority, as we gave this authority to the government. But when Erdogan wanted to do it in Turkey, it was perceived ambiguously. For me, this was a normal phenomenon, since democracy is just breaking up Turkey, and it has always been saved by the introduction of a military dictatorship. Turkey and democracy are things that are not compatible. But Turkish society rejected Turkish authorities’ more authority over Erdogan and 51% is too little for such a profound reform. And instead of strengthening the power of Erdogan this referendum split Turkey on another principle. What’s significant is that those people who support Erdogan himself voted against. It turned out so – Erdogan – “Yes!”, And the referendum – “No!”. That is, not all those who voted “against” are supporters of Guleni, West, Islamists. Here is a completely different picture, and I think that this decision was not entirely successful. As for the meeting between Putin and Erdogan in Sochi, here we have an open perspective on military cooperation in Syria. We are now closely aligning this position. Turkey is now more and more inclined to dialogue and discuss the Syrian problem with Moscow, and not with Washington, and the alliance that I wrote about – the Moscow-Ankara axis acquires visible features. In Turkey itself, Erdogan’s position will be complicated. He can not retreat any more. Turkey has very big problems with the Kurds and if it wants to preserve its territorial integrity, the key to this lies not in Washington, but in Moscow. Similarly, this applies to Syria and Libya. And so the Eurasian path will be saving for Erdogan.

The interview was taken by Nijat Hajiyev


Source: yanicag.ru WARNING: SKETCHY LINK


Stauffenberg was Right!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s