Tweet
KAZIMIROV: "FRAME AGREEMENT" ON NK DOES NOT GUARANTEE NON-RESUMPTION OF WAR
DeFacto Agency, Armenia
June 27 2006
The "frame agreement" on the Nagorno Karabakh conflict settlement
voiced by the U.S. does not guarantee non-resumption of hostilities in
Nagorno Karabakh, as only peacemakers' dislocation here is not enough,
the OSCE Minsk group Russian Co-Chair in 1992 - 1996, Ambassador
Vladimir Kazimirov told REGNUM Information Agency while commenting
on the statements made by the new U.S. Co-Chair for the conflict
settlement Matthew Bryza.
"It is the key issue. Without intrinsic, and not word guarantees of
the conflict parties plus international organizations (perhaps, even
the U. N. Security Council) one will not manage to initiate the first
stage, where the Azeris would like to see the liberation of a part of
the occupied territories and return of the forced migrants there. To
the accompaniment of the threats of power revenge, while the principles
of the disputes' peaceful settlements, non-application of force and
threats of force are being obviously violated, it is impossible to hope
for the beginning of realization of the first stage's measures. Only
the refusal of all the parties, without exception, of irresponsible
and waning power dreams can open the way for real changes in the
situation, practical implementation of the coordinated measures",
Vladimir Kazimirov stated. He noted "one should be quite naïve to
hope to obtain something from peaceful steps first and then get
"the wanting" by force - one can only cheat himself this way".
Estimating the fact of the Matthew Bryza's large interview as a new
Co-Chair, the Russian diplomat noted it was an unusual and even too
pretentious interview. "It may seem that the conflict parties and
mediators have failed to reach accords on Karabakh and decided to
come to understanding on something and all of a sudden agreed in
cancellation of the negotiation process's former confidentiality.
However, another approach is taken sometimes: rules are applied
allegedly to be violated", Kazimirov noted. He reminded that a few
years ago Baku, despite an agreement on the talks' confidentiality,
had published the full texts of the three proposals made in 1997 -
1998 by the three Co-Chairs (Russia, the U. S. and France) to the
three conflict parties -Azerbaijan, Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh.
Then Yerevan did the same. "It is a bit strange that such
an interview is actually the first step undertaken by the new
U. S. Co-Chair. Couldn't he wait for the first visit to the conflict
region? There used to be numerous rakish mediators on Karabakh both
here, in Russia, and in other countries as well. However, where are
their achievements?" Vladimir Kazimirov noted.
In his words, in case the parties and mediators really decided to
make known the essence of the "frame agreement", it would be much
more reliable to read out the text of the project presented to the
two parties instead of a private interview with its retelling. "The
document's original is always more convincing, than its retelling.
Otherwise, the shaking of micro agreement between the parties is
worthy of regret. Especially if it has been done not by a conflict
party that can have various interests, but a mediator, who must honor
any agreement, even the procedure one, reverently" Vladimir Kazimirov
summed up.
--Boundary_(ID_PM5wy+7GybwB+ac0W2x3Kw)--
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
DeFacto Agency, Armenia
June 27 2006
The "frame agreement" on the Nagorno Karabakh conflict settlement
voiced by the U.S. does not guarantee non-resumption of hostilities in
Nagorno Karabakh, as only peacemakers' dislocation here is not enough,
the OSCE Minsk group Russian Co-Chair in 1992 - 1996, Ambassador
Vladimir Kazimirov told REGNUM Information Agency while commenting
on the statements made by the new U.S. Co-Chair for the conflict
settlement Matthew Bryza.
"It is the key issue. Without intrinsic, and not word guarantees of
the conflict parties plus international organizations (perhaps, even
the U. N. Security Council) one will not manage to initiate the first
stage, where the Azeris would like to see the liberation of a part of
the occupied territories and return of the forced migrants there. To
the accompaniment of the threats of power revenge, while the principles
of the disputes' peaceful settlements, non-application of force and
threats of force are being obviously violated, it is impossible to hope
for the beginning of realization of the first stage's measures. Only
the refusal of all the parties, without exception, of irresponsible
and waning power dreams can open the way for real changes in the
situation, practical implementation of the coordinated measures",
Vladimir Kazimirov stated. He noted "one should be quite naïve to
hope to obtain something from peaceful steps first and then get
"the wanting" by force - one can only cheat himself this way".
Estimating the fact of the Matthew Bryza's large interview as a new
Co-Chair, the Russian diplomat noted it was an unusual and even too
pretentious interview. "It may seem that the conflict parties and
mediators have failed to reach accords on Karabakh and decided to
come to understanding on something and all of a sudden agreed in
cancellation of the negotiation process's former confidentiality.
However, another approach is taken sometimes: rules are applied
allegedly to be violated", Kazimirov noted. He reminded that a few
years ago Baku, despite an agreement on the talks' confidentiality,
had published the full texts of the three proposals made in 1997 -
1998 by the three Co-Chairs (Russia, the U. S. and France) to the
three conflict parties -Azerbaijan, Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh.
Then Yerevan did the same. "It is a bit strange that such
an interview is actually the first step undertaken by the new
U. S. Co-Chair. Couldn't he wait for the first visit to the conflict
region? There used to be numerous rakish mediators on Karabakh both
here, in Russia, and in other countries as well. However, where are
their achievements?" Vladimir Kazimirov noted.
In his words, in case the parties and mediators really decided to
make known the essence of the "frame agreement", it would be much
more reliable to read out the text of the project presented to the
two parties instead of a private interview with its retelling. "The
document's original is always more convincing, than its retelling.
Otherwise, the shaking of micro agreement between the parties is
worthy of regret. Especially if it has been done not by a conflict
party that can have various interests, but a mediator, who must honor
any agreement, even the procedure one, reverently" Vladimir Kazimirov
summed up.
--Boundary_(ID_PM5wy+7GybwB+ac0W2x3Kw)--
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress