In an interview for the YouTube channel Daily Europe Online, Laman Nazarova, an expert from CASPIA analytical center, discussed the evolving geopolitical situation in the South Caucasus, focusing on Armenia’s growing engagement with the European Union, the declining influence of Russia in the region, Azerbaijan’s expanding strategic role, and the broader transformation of the post-Soviet space.

The conversation began with the recent European Political Community summit held in Yerevan. Nazarova argued that the event was significant not only diplomatically but also symbolically. In her view, Armenia used the summit to send several messages simultaneously: internally, to demonstrate the legitimacy of the current leadership ahead of future elections; externally, to signal openness toward European integration and attract political and financial support from Europe; and strategically, to show Moscow that Armenia is increasingly willing to distance itself from Russia. At the same time, she stressed that Armenia remains deeply dependent on Russia economically and structurally, particularly in the energy and transport sectors, making a complete geopolitical shift difficult in the near term.

Throughout the interview, Nazarova repeatedly described the South Caucasus as a highly vulnerable region shaped by competing interests of larger powers. According to her, the future stability of the region depends largely on the normalization process between Azerbaijan and Armenia and on whether external actors refrain from interfering in that process. She argued that France, in particular, has been trying to strengthen its influence in the South Caucasus following the weakening of Russia’s regional position. Armenia, she suggested, has become Paris’s preferred entry point into the region.

Discussing relations between Azerbaijan and European institutions, Nazarova pointed to what she described as growing fragmentation within the European Union itself. She claimed that different EU bodies and member states increasingly pursue separate political agendas rather than a unified value-based approach. Referring to debates in Europe about Armenian detainees in Azerbaijan, she rejected descriptions of them as “political prisoners” or “hostages,” insisting instead that they were individuals convicted for involvement in separatist activities connected to Karabakh.

A substantial portion of the interview focused on Russia and its reaction to Azerbaijan’s increasingly independent foreign policy. Responding to comments made by former Ukrainian Prime Minister Mykola Azarov, who accused President Ilham Aliyev of moving away from the political line associated with Heydar Aliyev, Nazarova described such statements as indirect signals reflecting the mood within Russian political circles. She argued that Moscow’s influence across the post-Soviet space is gradually eroding as a result of the war in Ukraine, sanctions, and broader geopolitical shifts. In her assessment, Azerbaijan has consolidated an independent foreign policy course, Armenia is attempting to diversify its partnerships, Kazakhstan is strengthening its defense posture, and even Belarus is cautiously broadening its ties with China.

Energy diplomacy emerged as another central theme of the discussion. Nazarova emphasized that Azerbaijan’s gas exports to Europe, including supplies reaching countries such as Germany and Austria, have significantly strengthened Baku’s geopolitical position. She argued that relations between Azerbaijan and major European states are now increasingly driven by strategic interests and energy security considerations rather than ideological narratives about democracy or values. According to her, Europe no longer approaches Azerbaijan from a position of superiority but from one of pragmatic partnership.

The interview also touched on Kazakhstan and the broader trend of military modernization across the region. Commenting on recent remarks by Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev regarding defense reforms and military modernization, Nazarova linked these developments to a growing sense of instability in the international system. She suggested that many regional states no longer trust external security guarantees and increasingly believe they must rely on their own military capabilities.

Another important topic was Turkey’s evolving international role. Nazarova described Turkey as a unique actor that remains a NATO member while simultaneously pursuing an independent foreign policy agenda involving cooperation with Russia, China, and regional Middle Eastern powers. In her view, this strategic autonomy creates unease within Europe and reflects deeper fractures emerging inside Western alliances themselves.

Toward the end of the interview, the discussion became more philosophical, focusing on Europe’s understanding of civilization, identity, and political values. Nazarova criticized what she described as Europe’s tendency to impose its own standards and political models on other societies while simultaneously failing to resolve internal issues such as migration tensions, Islamophobia, and political polarization. She questioned the continued use of hierarchical concepts such as the “developed world” and the “third world,” arguing that such language reflects lingering imperial attitudes rather than genuine respect for cultural diversity.

Overall, the interview presented a distinctly realist interpretation of international politics. Nazarova portrayed the South Caucasus as a region entering a new geopolitical phase marked by declining Russian dominance, increased competition among external actors, growing strategic importance of energy resources, and a broader shift toward multipolarity in global affairs.