What is Azerbaijan’s place in the Eastern Partnership and what is next for the region of the South Caucasus? These issues are discussed in the latest Talk Eastern Europe podcast.

In a new round of negotiations, both Armenia and Azerbaijan appeared to express their intentions to make peace among themselves and resolve their long-disputed territory claims. It did not take long for the negotiation process to get spoiled by the jingoistic and nationalist rhetoric against the very idea of negotiating peace for Nagorno-Karabakh.

After Yuri Khachaturov, Secretary General of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), was recalled in early November 2018 as a result of governmental changes and criminal investigations against him in his native Armenia, the top position became vacant. The aftermath has exposed on Armenia’s vulnerable position in the organisation.

Closing in on the 100th anniversary of the end of the First World War, what did it mean for Azerbaijani statehood at the time? What does it mean for the Azerbaijan of today?

A conversation with Leyla and Arif Yunus, Azerbaijani human rights activists. Interviewer: Valentin Luntumbue.

VALENTIN LUNTUMBUE: I would like to begin by talking about the beginning of your engagement in the last hours of the Soviet Union, the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict and the rise to power of Heydar Aliyev?

LEYLA YUNUS (LY): We are both historians and we began our work during the Soviet times. I was a member of the underground movement of national minorities against the Soviet regime and we were working with an underground newspaper, published in Moscow, called Express Khronika. The chief editor was Aleksandr Podrabinek. They had correspondents in different countries including Georgia, Armenia, Belarus and Ukraine; and we were responsible for Azerbaijan, together with Arif.

Today, separatist conflicts are the main threat for stability in many countries in the post-Soviet space. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, several conflicts have broken out in the region. While many European policy-makers focus on Crimea, Abkhazia and Transnistria, the conflict in Nagorno-Karabakh remains mostly ignored by the western world.

Interview with Arif Hacılı, the leader of the Musavat opposition party in Azerbaijan. Interviewer: Malgosia Krakowska.

Despite China's assurances that Baku-Beijing-Tbilisi relations are to be based on the principle of equilibrium, with economic gain being the sole motivation, the impression of political dominance is hard to avoid. It is estimated that the old patterns of regional rivalries will further change with China’s expansions westwards, with China becoming a regional stabiliser.

External actions of local governments are developed and regulated based on the competences vested in them by the national laws. While local authorities occasionally tend to ignore these regulations, they have to be aware of the consequences of their actions and bear in mind the circumstances abroad that should be handled with extreme caution.

The Summit’s results have been less ambitious than some of the participants might have expected. The EU confirmed its commitment to the initiative, cautiously putting on the plate a set of limited reforms. Any more consistent steps forward seem to be unfeasible, as there are still numerous points of disagreement among the EU members and their eastern partners.

The European Union’s commitment to the Eastern Partnership region has been cemented by Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, but for internal reasons, the EU is trying to avoid the costs linked to the countries’ integration. For Russia, the region is vitally important but Moscow cannot muster the resources or an attractive alternative to keep the countries close.

The Azerbaijani opposition has survived, even though the civil society has been significantly repressed. They have observed Ukraine and Georgia and learnt from the two countries successes and mistakes. Next time Ilham Aliyev’s power is shaken, they will be ready to act.