Tweet
Former Russian mediator has "pro-Armenian" stance over Karabakh - Azeri paper
Ekho, Baku
12 Jan 05
Former Azerbaijani foreign minister Tofiq Zulfuqarov has accused the
Russian diplomat, Vladimir Kazimirov, of issuing "blatantly"
pro-Armenian statements in the media. Zulfuqarov suggested that there
is a certain reason behind his articles distorting the background of
the Karabakh conflict, as "at present no-one is doing anything without
interest". Condemning Kazimirov - former OSCE mediator in the Karabakh
settlement - for a lack of neutrality, MP Camil Hasanli called on the
Russian diplomat to learn the history of Karabakh. Excerpt from
R. Orucev's report published by Ekho Azerbaijani newspaper on 12
January 2005 headlined "Why does Kazimirov not calm down" and
subheaded "Former cochairman of the OSCE Minsk Group is again
protecting Karabakh separatists, distorting historic facts"
The former Russian co-chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group [specially
designed to settle the Karabakh conflict], Vladimir Kazimirov, sent an
article yesterday to the pro-Armenian Regnum Russian news agency
headlined "Nagornyy Karabakh should take part in the
negotiations". The article had been written in the run-up to a meeting
held yesterday [11th January] between Azerbaijani and Armenian foreign
ministers in Prague.
It is interesting that the diplomat, who was directly involved in the
settling process as a mediator and, therefore, should have maintained
neutrality in his statements, has repeatedly made blatantly
pro-Armenian and pro-separatist statements in the media.
Kazimirov has recently published in Regnum an open letter to the PACE
co-rapporteur, David Atkinson, accusing the European MP of being
pro-Azerbaijani. This time again, he accused Baku of failing up to
now to recognize Nagornyy Karabakh as a party to the conflict and of
refusing to hold negotiations with it. Therefore, Kazimirov, writes,
"additional and artificial obstacles are being created in the Karabakh
settlement".
"Nagornyy Karabakh is the core and heart of this conflict, therefore,
it cannot be an object alone. The Karabakh population has a vital
interest - much gre ater than other residents of Azerbaijan or Armenia
- in settling the conflict. The status of Nagornyy Karabakh is the
main reason and disputed problem in this conflict.
[Passage omitted: quotes from Kazimirov's article]
Commenting on this article, former Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Tofiq
Zulfuqarov said: "Above all, Mr Kazimirov is demonstrating keen
interest in supporting the Armenian position. We can guess the reason
behind this interest, as it is clear that at present no-one is doing
anything without interest. There are certain views in regard with
this, but I would not like to go into details. In fact, certain
circles of Armenia, possibly, the state recruited Kazimirov to
propagate the Armenian position. His statements do not trigger any
interest in the Russian public, so it is the region of the conflict
that reacts to his articles, which are already published regularly. He
[Kazimirov] will only represent some interest until there is reaction
in Azerbaijan."
Kazimirov's argument that Azerbaijan allegedly has no desire to talk
to Karabakh's Armenians is the weakest point in his article,
Zulfuqarov said. "If this was so, Azerbaijan would not have supported
the 24 March format of the Minsk conference, which says that selected
representatives and other members of Karabakh will take part in a
conference as an interested party.
[Passage omitted: a number of negotiations have been held within the
Minsk Group]
Both Azeris and Armenians of Nagornyy Karabakh took part in the
negotiations as interested parties. That is to say, Kazimirov's thesis
that Azerbaijan does not want to talk to Armenians of Nagornyy
Karabakh is wide of the mark since such negotiations have already
taken place.
"But the issue is about a different thing. At the end of the
negotiating process, Armenians want to obtain the status of Nagornyy
Karabakh - an independent state or a part of Armenia. Understanding
that at the current stage of the negotiating process, they cannot
achieve this from Azerbaijan and from the international community,
they are trying to increase the negotiations status of the Karabakh
Armenians and to make it [Karabakh] equal to recognized states. This
is the task of the Armenian side and this is why Kazimirov has been
recruited to protect this position," Zulfuqarov said.
"The historic" aspects of Kazimirov's article are shocking. He says
that even the League of Nations acknowledged Karabakh as a disputed
territory. A well-known historian and MP Camil Hasanli has commented
on this: "First, Karabakh was never on the agenda of the League of
Nations. During the existence of the first republic [the Azerbaijani
Democratic Republic; 1918-1920], Azerbaijan appealed to the League of
Nations for membership. An international commission was set dealing
with its admission. However, later on, the process of making
Azerbaijan a Soviet republic started and the country failed to obtain
membership of the League of Nations. If Kazimirov wants to speculate
on history, he should know that in 1919, the Armenian community of
Karabakh appealed to the Azerbaijani Democratic Republic and
recognized themselves as part of Azerbaijan confirming that they have
no problems with the state. This document is available in the archives
of Azerbaijan and Kazimirov can find and learn them."
[Passage omitted: more historic details; at the beginning of the 20th
century ethnic Armenians made up only seven per cent of the Karabakh
population]
Ekho, Baku
12 Jan 05
Former Azerbaijani foreign minister Tofiq Zulfuqarov has accused the
Russian diplomat, Vladimir Kazimirov, of issuing "blatantly"
pro-Armenian statements in the media. Zulfuqarov suggested that there
is a certain reason behind his articles distorting the background of
the Karabakh conflict, as "at present no-one is doing anything without
interest". Condemning Kazimirov - former OSCE mediator in the Karabakh
settlement - for a lack of neutrality, MP Camil Hasanli called on the
Russian diplomat to learn the history of Karabakh. Excerpt from
R. Orucev's report published by Ekho Azerbaijani newspaper on 12
January 2005 headlined "Why does Kazimirov not calm down" and
subheaded "Former cochairman of the OSCE Minsk Group is again
protecting Karabakh separatists, distorting historic facts"
The former Russian co-chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group [specially
designed to settle the Karabakh conflict], Vladimir Kazimirov, sent an
article yesterday to the pro-Armenian Regnum Russian news agency
headlined "Nagornyy Karabakh should take part in the
negotiations". The article had been written in the run-up to a meeting
held yesterday [11th January] between Azerbaijani and Armenian foreign
ministers in Prague.
It is interesting that the diplomat, who was directly involved in the
settling process as a mediator and, therefore, should have maintained
neutrality in his statements, has repeatedly made blatantly
pro-Armenian and pro-separatist statements in the media.
Kazimirov has recently published in Regnum an open letter to the PACE
co-rapporteur, David Atkinson, accusing the European MP of being
pro-Azerbaijani. This time again, he accused Baku of failing up to
now to recognize Nagornyy Karabakh as a party to the conflict and of
refusing to hold negotiations with it. Therefore, Kazimirov, writes,
"additional and artificial obstacles are being created in the Karabakh
settlement".
"Nagornyy Karabakh is the core and heart of this conflict, therefore,
it cannot be an object alone. The Karabakh population has a vital
interest - much gre ater than other residents of Azerbaijan or Armenia
- in settling the conflict. The status of Nagornyy Karabakh is the
main reason and disputed problem in this conflict.
[Passage omitted: quotes from Kazimirov's article]
Commenting on this article, former Azerbaijani Foreign Minister Tofiq
Zulfuqarov said: "Above all, Mr Kazimirov is demonstrating keen
interest in supporting the Armenian position. We can guess the reason
behind this interest, as it is clear that at present no-one is doing
anything without interest. There are certain views in regard with
this, but I would not like to go into details. In fact, certain
circles of Armenia, possibly, the state recruited Kazimirov to
propagate the Armenian position. His statements do not trigger any
interest in the Russian public, so it is the region of the conflict
that reacts to his articles, which are already published regularly. He
[Kazimirov] will only represent some interest until there is reaction
in Azerbaijan."
Kazimirov's argument that Azerbaijan allegedly has no desire to talk
to Karabakh's Armenians is the weakest point in his article,
Zulfuqarov said. "If this was so, Azerbaijan would not have supported
the 24 March format of the Minsk conference, which says that selected
representatives and other members of Karabakh will take part in a
conference as an interested party.
[Passage omitted: a number of negotiations have been held within the
Minsk Group]
Both Azeris and Armenians of Nagornyy Karabakh took part in the
negotiations as interested parties. That is to say, Kazimirov's thesis
that Azerbaijan does not want to talk to Armenians of Nagornyy
Karabakh is wide of the mark since such negotiations have already
taken place.
"But the issue is about a different thing. At the end of the
negotiating process, Armenians want to obtain the status of Nagornyy
Karabakh - an independent state or a part of Armenia. Understanding
that at the current stage of the negotiating process, they cannot
achieve this from Azerbaijan and from the international community,
they are trying to increase the negotiations status of the Karabakh
Armenians and to make it [Karabakh] equal to recognized states. This
is the task of the Armenian side and this is why Kazimirov has been
recruited to protect this position," Zulfuqarov said.
"The historic" aspects of Kazimirov's article are shocking. He says
that even the League of Nations acknowledged Karabakh as a disputed
territory. A well-known historian and MP Camil Hasanli has commented
on this: "First, Karabakh was never on the agenda of the League of
Nations. During the existence of the first republic [the Azerbaijani
Democratic Republic; 1918-1920], Azerbaijan appealed to the League of
Nations for membership. An international commission was set dealing
with its admission. However, later on, the process of making
Azerbaijan a Soviet republic started and the country failed to obtain
membership of the League of Nations. If Kazimirov wants to speculate
on history, he should know that in 1919, the Armenian community of
Karabakh appealed to the Azerbaijani Democratic Republic and
recognized themselves as part of Azerbaijan confirming that they have
no problems with the state. This document is available in the archives
of Azerbaijan and Kazimirov can find and learn them."
[Passage omitted: more historic details; at the beginning of the 20th
century ethnic Armenians made up only seven per cent of the Karabakh
population]