EU could use 'soft power' to settl

Interview with Alex Jackson, an expert on politics and security in the Caspian region and former editor of the Caucasian Review of Int'l Affairs.

What are the main differences between the Russian and Western approaches to the independent republics created after the collapse of the Soviet Union?

Essentially, Russia sees the post-Soviet states as members of its family, with Russia itself as the head of the family. However this family is unruly and many of the members have slipped away from the control of the family head. Some of these family members (like Georgia) require more tough measures than others (like Kazakhstan) to bring them into line. Although Russia does not want to actually control these states directly, it wants them to be aligned with its interests and policies.

This sense of the former Soviet Union as a family is relevant for ideological reasons, because many policymakers in Moscow, particularly Putin, still view the former Soviet states as historically and culturally part of a greater Russia. It is also relevant for strategic reasons, as these neighbouring states are critical to Russia's long-term geopolitical strategy (in terms of energy, security and politics).

The West tends to view the former Soviet states more as independent actors, and as partners in their own right. This does not mean that Europe is necessarily "better" - it is often unfocused and contradictory in the way it approaches the region. Many regional states are frustrated by the fact that the EU moves slowly and is uncoordinated in comparison with Russia.

Do you expect changes in Russia’s approach to its neighbours' rapprochement with Europe?

Changes in Russian foreign policy towards its neighbours depend to a large extent on two factors: internal and global. The internal politics of Russia and Russia's economic performance affect its foreign policy. High oil prices and political competition or potential instability encourage it to act more assertively towards its neighbours. The presidential elections next year could encourage a return to a more confrontational foreign policy if Vladimir Putin returns to the presidency.

The relationship with the US also has a significant impact on Russian policy towards its neighbours. Recent years have shown that a stronger US policy of building influence in the former Soviet Union provokes an equally strong reaction from Russia. We saw this over missile defence, Kosovo, NATO enlargement, and the war in Georgia was the most powerful example. If the "reset" with the US fails, as some commentators are currently arguing, then this may be reflected in a more aggressive Russian line towards neighbouring states that it perceives are too pro-American.

Does the EU see the CIS states as possible EU members?

It is unlikely that any of the current CIS states would be considered potential EU members anytime soon. Turkey's accession process is a huge problem for the EU and there is a lot of scepticism over whether it will get in. This fact, along with the serious political and financial crisis sweeping Europe, makes it very implausible that the EU would take on any new member states from the CIS in the near future.

What are the prospects for a peaceful settlement of the Karabakh problem, when the sides still hold opposite positions? What kind of role can the West play in this process?

Currently there is very little progress on the Karabakh settlement. Although the presidents have held a number of meetings over the last year, there has been no progress to show for it and indeed both sides have engaged in public disputes on many occasions. Russian attempts to get Armenia and Azerbaijan to sign a plan for a peaceful settlement have failed so far and international mediators are very frustrated. However, it is unlikely the peace talks will collapse entirely - both sides have an interest in the talks continuing. And a return to war is very unlikely at this stage.

The West has had a limited role so far in settling the Karabakh conflict. It has generally let Russia take the lead. Although the US has invested some time and energy, it has no direct strategic interest. Europe has been even less involved. However, the EU (not NATO) could have a role to play, using its "soft power" experience and its record of helping to defuse tensions in the Western Balkans to encourage both sides to compromise and reach a final settlement.