Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Foreign Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advisor to the OSCE Minsk Group says Russia used Nagorno‑Karabakh dispute to hold sway over Armenia and Azerbaijan
Summary
An advisor to the OSCE Minsk Group told a hearing that Russia preferred a frozen Nagorno‑Karabakh conflict because it allowed Moscow to sell arms to both sides, retain leverage in Yerevan, and pursue a north‑south transport corridor—while the West pushed an East‑West trade route tied to critical raw materials.
An advisor to the OSCE Minsk Group said Russia has long treated the Nagorno‑Karabakh dispute as a tool of influence rather than a problem it sought to resolve.
"I spent more than two years of my life working as an advisor to the OSCE Minsk Group," the advisor said, describing his direct involvement with the body co‑chaired by France, the United States and Russia. He said that surface cooperation among Minsk Group diplomats masked deeper strategic aims.
The advisor argued Moscow benefited from an unresolved conflict because it allowed Moscow to remain indispensable to both Armenia and Azerbaijan. "The Russians sold weapons to both countries and they made themselves the indispensable actor for both sides," he said, adding that a negotiated settlement would reduce Baku's geopolitical reliance on Russia.
He said Armenia remained more dependent on Russia in part because of a Russian military presence and Armenia's membership in the Collective Security Treaty Organization, but that influence in Yerevan diminished after Armenia's Velvet Revolution in 2018.
Beyond bilateral leverage, the advisor said Russia pursued broader geostrategic aims: building a north‑south corridor linking Russia through the Russian‑occupied Georgian region of Abkhazia, across western Georgia into Armenia and on to Iran. He described this as a longstanding Russian objective to secure overland access toward the Middle East.
By contrast, he said the United States and European partners favored an East‑West corridor connecting Central and South Asia to Turkey and Europe, a project now viewed as increasingly important because of critical raw materials and rare earths.
On tactics, the advisor said Russia historically acted "quietly and subrosa using proxies and other tools" to block resolution of the dispute, but that its operations have become more overt in recent years.
The advisor's remarks were framed as an analysis of Russian strategic interests and did not include direct responses from Russian officials. The hearing record contains no formal vote or action attributable to this testimony.
