Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

E. Mamedyarov & V. Drannikov - Suspicious Tandem

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • E. Mamedyarov & V. Drannikov - Suspicious Tandem

    E. MAMEDYAROV AND V. DRANNIKOV - SUSPICIOUS TANDEM

    Azat Artsakh - Republic of Nagorno Karabakh
    Sept 26 2005

    The article entitled "Mountain Rebuke" by V. Drannikov was published in
    the Russian Newsweek, which touched upon the public political situation
    in Nagorno Karabakh Republic and the prospects of resolution of the
    Karabakh conflict. In my opinion, the article contained information
    which, intended or not, forms a distorted picture of several aspects
    of the Karabakh issue in the minds of the Russian readers. Thus,
    having read the article, one might start thinking that in the course of
    events of 1988-1994 in Nagorno Karabakh and around it there were only
    Azerbaijani refugees; moreover, the author points out the existence
    of 30 thousand Azerbaijani refugees. The Azerbaijani foreign minister
    almost shares this opinion, considering the return of refugees to their
    former places of residence as an essential element of the talks. At
    least, it seems strange that it did not occur to the author of the
    article to doubt Mamedyarov in reference to the Armenian refugees,
    for the number of refugees from only the capital city Baku was several
    times as much as the abovementioned number. However, even a starting
    journalist should realize that completely ignoring the interests of one
    of the sides cannot benefit the resolution of the problem which has
    equal importance for both sides. V. Drannikov should also be worried
    about the issue of stationing peacemaking forces in the conflict area,
    raised by E. Mamedyarov. The thing is that the sides have maintained
    the ceasefire for over 11 years, and the particular cases of breaking
    the armistice have a local character. And this situation is supposed
    to continue until the resolution of the conflict. Therefore, we may
    suppose that through the proposal of stationing peacemakers in the
    conflict area the Azerbaijani side is trying to dispose of the NKR
    armed forces which have become one of the important arguments in the
    settlement of the Karabakh conflict, as well as the guarantor of the
    security of the security of the people of Nagorno Karabakh through
    someone else. E. Mamedyarov considers the future status of Nagorno
    Karabakh as one of the essential arguments in the negotiations. By
    using the word "future", he probably means to remind that the former
    status of the region, i.e. an autonomous region in Azerbaijan SSR, was
    eliminated by the unilateral decision of the Azerbaijani government,
    and that granting a similar status to Nagorno Karabakh would be a
    great favour to it.

    Good reason, however, prompts that in the current situation it
    would be appropriate to consider neither the former nor the future
    status of Nagorno Karabakh but its present status, i.e. the sovereign
    Republic of Nagorno Karabakh, which formed in accordance with the law
    on the secession from the USSR, similarly to independent Republic of
    Azerbaijan. In this state of things only the issue of recognition of
    the country which has existed for 14 years now can become a subject
    of negotiations. Now about the issue holding "a pride of place" in the
    talks. It is notable that the title of the article and the judgements
    of E. Mamedyarov suit each other. But the author of the article did
    not pay attention to the biased character of the judgements of the
    foreign minister of Azerbaijan. I wonder if V.

    Drannikov does not know that the armed forces of Azerbaijan occupied
    a considerable area of NKR. Maybe this cannot be compared to the
    Azerbaijani territory controlled by our troops but for us an Armenian
    village is more valuable than an Azerbaijani region. Touching
    upon the issue of liberation of the occupied territories, the
    author of the article cites the following words of Mamedyarov,
    "The liberation of these regions should be the first step towards
    the resolution of the Karabakh conflict." First of all, all the
    Azerbaijani regions controlled by our armed forces forming a neutral
    zone around NKR are meant here. However, there is not a single word
    about the simultaneous liberation of our territories. Second, the
    word "liberation" has a clear and unambiguous meaning here, whereas
    the notion of "resolution" is void of a particular meaning. Thus,
    a great number of issues are up in the air. Such a standpoint of the
    Azerbaijani foreign ministry does not confirm the words of the foreign
    minister of Armenia Vartan Oskanian that the latest meeting of the
    presidents of Azerbaijan assured the peace process. The impression
    is that either E. Mamedyarov is not well-aware of the content of the
    talks between the tow presidents or V. Oskanian offers the desirable
    instead of the real. Both are dangerous for the sides in reaching an
    acceptable resolution, which requires clarifying the standpoints of
    the sides. This article, unfortunately, does not benefit this, and
    we addressed a message to the magazine. Realizing that the article
    may be a propagandist action initiated by the Azerbaijani side,
    hopefully the official bodies of NKR and Armenia will express their
    attitude towards it.
Working...
X