Azerbaijan, Baku, July 3/ corr. Trend News/

Azerbaijani Presidential Administration Department for political analysis and information provision Head Elnur Aslanov gave an interview to RIA Novosti correspondent Geray Dadashev

Q: What is your estimation of results of Russian President Dmitriy Medvedev's working visit to Baku on June 29?

A: The visit was short, but of very positive character. Large specter of issues has been discussed and cooperation in the gas field will be launched as a result. As the presidents of Russia and Azerbaijan stated, our countries have an experience of interaction in oil field. Now we will develop interaction in the gas field. Taking it into consideration, goods turnover will increase obviously and economic component of bilateral relations will improve. It all is a positive factor.

Several documents, including those covering diplomatic field and border delimitation between the two countries, were signed during President Medvedev's visit

It enables us to make an essential step forward to develop relations between the two equal-right partners, countries which have a Treaty on friendship and strategic partnership signed in 2008. This visit is a logic end of this treaty. 

Q: Could agreement achieved during the Russian president's visit to Baku affect the regional policy?

A: Presently Azerbaijan is unambiguous leader in the South Caucasus region both in term of economic development and political interaction with countries of the region and global world.

It's not secret that not only the possession of hydrocarbons, but also balanced policy of Azerbaijan enables to state that the country acts as a conductor of many interests in the South Caucasus. Obviously, many countries understand that complex interaction with the South Caucasus region is possible through interaction with Azerbaijan and relations formed through equal and proper cooperation.

I'd never say that interaction between Russia and Azerbaijan can change any balance in the region. Presidents Aliyev and Medvedev said that there should not be room for speculations.

Presently, geopolitics is substantially geo-economics and economic interests, in particular, definite national interests of every nation, predefine the position the country acts from.

While making any decision Azerbaijan comes out from its own national interests, economic component and profitability of any proposal.

In term of cooperation in oil and gas field Russia and Azerbaijan obviously proceed from existing projects and ways, absence of difficulties in agreements with any transit country. Furthermore, there are routes and communications which should be activated and realized.

Q: Nevertheless, political component of gas issues are exactly observed. Could an agreement on Azerbaijani gas supply to Russia complicate relations Baku's relations with the West?

A: I don't think. A range of issues which can be of interests of any side, are still to be realized. Some issues are on agenda yet. They are discussed and unfortunately, are waiting for their final realization. Every country should come from its national strategy. To wait for anyone to persuade someone and take relevant decision in terms of global financial crisis does not meet the countries' interests.

I'd repeat that present geopolitics is geo-economics. It is necessary to proceed from economic realities and to demonstrate mobile policy in any issue. The winner is who acts quickly, actively and with understanding of realities of the day.

Q: Don't you mean it's better to proceed with the established relations rather hypothetic options?

A: We don't speak about hypothetic options, but options that can be realized though mobile and active policy.

It is necessary to come from understanding of economic priorities and profitability. If there is a project, discussion and its realization, and it is on the agenda and table, why not to implement it, waiting for years to realize another project?

If any project should be realized, it must be discussed today. Should it is adjourned, and then its approval is postponed, it is better to seek other ways. In particular, the ways of diversifying energy resources, as President Aliyev said.

Q: There are ideas that developing close ties with Russia, Azerbaijan restricts flexibility straightening its relation with the West. How could you comment it?

A: I don't agree with you absolutely. I cannot share the position when the Azerbaijani president's every visit to Russia or vice versa, and European countries are unilaterally explained as Azerbaijan's redirection of its policy to the west, to the north, etc.

Azerbaijan pursues its private foreign policy, which is multivector and targets establishing equal-right relations with the countries of the world. The country backs the vector of mutual relations enabling to speak about of political and economic profitability.

Azerbaijan develops its multivector policy with consideration of its national interests. Indeed, we understand it might evolve some question, but they are groundless. Our overall policy over a decade has been based on these aspects. It was so during President Heydar Aliyev's presidency and remains the same presently.

We have close relations with the OIC, but it does not mean Azerbaijan is redirected at the Islamic world. We have close relations with the European Union and realize the EU Eastern Partnership program. But it does not mean we are unilaterally directed at Europe. We are for integration into the European world, we are active in European military political and economic institutes, but we maintain very close historical and traditional relations with the Russian Federation. 

This is preservation and expansion of the mutual relations that we developed with Russia for years. This is one of priorities of our foreign policy.

Q: To what extent could President Dmitriy Medevedev's visit impact on the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict?

A: The Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh is on agenda of the Azerbaijani president's all meetings - not only with the Russian president, but almost heads of all countries and different international organizations.

The conflict should be solved on the basis of principles of the international law, in particular, a principle of territorial integrity. Azerbaijan will never step back from this principle. The question which are on agenda, the dynamic which exists yield their results and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict will find its solution on condition of constructive position that Armenian leadership should demonstrate.

We regret that Armenia takes enough irrational position. Consequently, it delays settlement of the conflict. Armenia should demonstrate wise approaches and deeper understanding to that fact the country is out of global and regional projects due to unsettlement of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. 

Presently, Yerevan isolates itself, withdraws itself from participating in any economic and political projects. The country is almost isolated in the South Caucasus region. The Armenian government should understand that it is necessary to live with will and aspirations of ordinary citizens of the country.

Q: What is your estimation of domestic political situation in Azerbaijan in the context of activation of pro-Islamic forces on the country?

A: I think this question lacks ground at present. It needless to speak about any Islamist forces in Azerbaijan. I understand that you mean some facts when some groups, nurtured in an absolutely strange environment for Azerbaijan, tried to instigate here their plans. Generally, activation of Islamist groups is not observed in the country.

Indeed, it is possible to speak about religious renaissance worldwide, but the process does not deprive Azerbaijan from its secularity. Azerbaijan, as a nation with dominantly Muslim population, preserves open democratic face.

Islam is a religion, which the most population of the country worships. This is a fact. At the same time, Jews, Christians and representatives of other untraditional religions and sects work and live should to shoulder with Muslim Azerbaijanis. Azerbaijan remains to be the most tolerant country in the world and it was reiterated in a number of reports of the influential international organizations. 

Q: Israeli President Shimon Peres has paid an official visit to Azerbaijan (June 28-29). What is your estimation of it results from aspect of developing bilateral relations?

A: Israeli President Shimon Peres's visit to Azerbaijan was of historic character. It defines future of Azerbaijani-Israeli relations.

Furthermore, I'd say, it was of historic character in the context of forming new relations between Azerbaijan, an Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) member-country, and Israel. This is a new page in formation of Israel's policy in the South Caucasus.

The visit was noticeable. It became crucial in the development of relations between Azerbaijan and Israel. We sincerely hope that the relations between the two nations will further upgrade rapidly and serve interests and favor of both nations.

A great number of Jews reside in Azerbaijan and a great number of former citizens of Azerbaijan reside in Israel. This is a large lobby, as President Aliyev said, and we are very interested to develop efficiently our relations with Israel.

Q: Is it possible to put straighten an Azerbaijan-Turkey-Israel configuration in the regional policy?

A: The agenda does not include this item, though such issues frequently are put forward by expert communities of Turkey, Azerbaijan and Israel and made a platform for discussions. In this term, such 'triangles' are indeed interesting, whilst in a context of realizing state interests they do not meet either multivector, or balanced character of the Azerbaijani foreign policy pursued for years.

Q: Media reports urge that Tehran recalled Iranian ambassador in Azerbaijan for consultations in connection with the Israeli president's visit to Baku. The reports are still to have official confirmation, but they are spread. What is on the backdrop?

A: I would not like to make this question a topic for political speculations media.

Every country realized a policy specified by its foreign policy priorities. Iran is our neighbor, a country which we have traditionally close mutual relations. So, I would not hurry to make hasty statements. I think we have an area to discuss these issues.