Tweet
Regnum, Russia
Nov 4 2006
"Russian authorities are doing all possible for not being loved, but
Americans do it better": Azeri press digest
Azerbaijan-Russia
Excerpts from the interview of political expert Arif Yunusov to
Day.Az:
"How big is Russia's influence on Azerbaijan, today?"
I think that, today, the Americans have a bit bigger influence in
Azerbaijan. True, in the first two years of Ilham Aliyev's rule,
their influence was much bigger, but in the last months Russia has
become much more active.
The local media were right when they said that the Oct 2005 arrest of
the pro-western economic development minister Farhad Aliyev - who was
seen by many as Azeri Yushchenko or Saakashvili - was, undoubtedly,
the work of Russia, more precisely, its special services. It was
Russia's biggest victory over the US in Azerbaijan in the last years.
Besides, there are pro-Russian men in Ilham Aliyev's team. Many of
them have businesses in Russia and can be used for pressure on
Azerbaijan. There are also Azeri emigrants. They also suffered from
the Russian-Georgian crisis, and, if there is a Russian-Azeri crisis,
their factor may play an even more serious role.
There is one more trump in Russia's hands: growing disappointment
with the US' policy in Azerbaijan. The anti-American moods are
getting so strong that even the Americans are beginning to notice it.
And what do our citizens say most often? What they say, in general,
is: "Russia never says that it wants to build democracy here. It
admits that it has its own interests in the region and wants to
restore its influence in Azerbaijan. Russia is not hypocritical. As
regards the Americans, they keep saying that the only thing they are
thinking about is to build democracy in Azerbaijan, but, in fact, the
only thing they are thinking about is how to get our oil and how to
use our territory against Muslims."
That's why Russia's authority in Azerbaijan is growing despite its
policy in the country. By their clumsy actions in the region, the
Russian authorities are doing all possible for not being loved, but
there are Americans who do it better. (Day.Az)
The Azeri office of the Russian Caucasian Institute of Democracy has
organized in Baku a roundtable "Energy Security of Azerbaijan: Pluses
and Minuses of Cooperation with Russia." Independent energy expert
Ilya Zaslavsky, oil and gas expert Georgy Nozadze and employee of the
Center for CIS Studies of Moscow State University Alexander Karavayev
took part in the event. Karavayev stressed the priority of politics
in the Russian-Azeri energy cooperation. He also spoke about the rise
in the Russian gas prices. He believes that "the gas weapon Russia is
trying to use is not giving it the expected results." Azerbaijan is
equal to Russia as it has its own energy resources and means of their
transportation. "I don't think that Russia can pressure Azerbaijan by
means of energy as Azerbaijan's energy security is beyond any
pressures and threats. Georgia and Armenia are a different story -
they seriously depend on Russia's energy," Karavayev said.
In his turn, the chairman of the Azeri National Public Committee on
Integration Ilgar Mamedov noted that Azerbaijan will gain from a new
rise in the Russian gas prices. "The point is that, after the first
rise, some partners, particularly, they in Armenia were strongly
displeased, and some local forces have already turned their eyes
westwards. If Russia does it again, Armenia will get even farther
from it, and this will serve our interests in the Nagorno-Karabakh
problem. In any case, new rise will not affect Azerbaijan's energy
security," Mamedov said. The director of the Center for Political
Innovation and Technologies Mubariz Ahmedoglu noted that if Russia
continues its energy blockade of Georgia, Azerbaijan will support its
neighbor and will partly cover Georgia's gas demand. "In terms of
energy security, it would be better for us if Russia more tightly
cooperated with Turkey."
Political expert Arif Yunusov agreed that the Azeri-Russian energy
cooperation is more dependent on politics than on economy. "It seems
to me that Russia has no clear energy policy. Yes, after the rise in
the gas prices, they in Russia were in some kind of euphoria over
Ukraine. However, the rise has also affected their strategic partners
- Belarus and Armenia - and this factor should make them anxious.
Russia has no clear energy policy, while we would like to clearly
know the energy priorities and goals of our neighbor, as energy
security depends on a complex of geo-political factors." (Echo)
Zerkalo says: "The strengthening of Russian-Armenian relations cannot
but influence the foreign policy of Azerbaijan. Until recently, there
has been a kind of status quo - a basic level - in Azeri-Russian
relations. But now that Moscow and Yerevan are coming increasingly
closer, Baku may turn its face towards the West, especially as all
this is happening before Ilham Aliyev's visit to the NATO
headquarters in Brussels.
It should also be noted that NATO Special Representative for the
South Caucasus Robert Simmons visited Baku quite recently. He openly
asked the Azeri leadership to clearly formulate their foreign policy
but received no answer. During the final press-conference he said
that in early Nov they in Brussels will give answers to all the
questions Azerbaijan is worried about.
If these answers are given and satisfy Baku, a new balance of forces
may take shape in the region in the near future - a pro-western
US-backed Azerbaijan-Georgia tandem that will oppose Russia-Armenia.
If this happens, Azerbaijan may change its present position
concerning the application of sanctions against Iran.
But there is one more scenario. In early Nov Ilham Aliyev is to go to
Moscow. Against the background of strengthening Russian-Armenian
relations, Vladimir Putin will have to offer Azerbaijan something
that would keep Baku away from NATO. This offer should not be
categorical and will hardly concern the Nagorno-Karabakh peace
process. Russia has proved that Armenia is closer to it; so, it will
hardly offer Azerbaijan anything profitable on Nagorno-Karabakh.
(Zerkalo)
Geo-politics
" They in Moscow and Washington think it possible that, in order to
dot all i's in their big geo-political game in the South Caucasus,
they will have to play for a government change during the coming
elections in Armenia and Azerbaijan. This is almost a foul play - a
play where they may lose much if not all - at least, for some time.
And this loss will endanger the geo-political interests of both the
West and Russia. So, the sides are trying to agree and to start
rivaling in "a more civilized manner." In fact, this second scenario
may result in agreements on the Armenian-Azeri conflict," says
Zerkalo.
"First, it will allow to avoid serious geo-political confrontation in
the region - which is good for both the West and Russia. They in the
Kremlin perfectly realize that, even with its huge oil export
incomes, Russia will not be able to confront the West and, first of
all, the US. If it tries to, it will have to become a fully "close
society," like it was in the Soviet times. This may result in an
"all-national default." And so, we can see that the Russian officials
are beginning to change their tone concerning Georgia.
Heavily dependent on Russian fuel, the West too would not like to use
"stick" against Russia.
Second, if Russia guarantees peace agreements in Nagorno-Karabakh, it
will gain, at least, temporary political influence in the region.
Geo-politically, Russia does not care much for who Nagorno-Karabakh
will belong to, but this will be a good chance for it to "show its
adherence" to the peaceful resolution of territorial-ethnic conflicts
in the CIS and, thereby, to gain wider room for maneuver when it is
time to settle the conflicts in Abkhazia or South Ossetia - the
conflicts Russia does care for.
Third, via Azerbaijan Russia will get something it has lost after its
crisis with Georgia - a stable land corridor to Armenia, Iran and
farther Turkey. Besides, Russia will be able to preserve its big
military contingent in Armenia (which is now in almost total
blockade) and to argue that it is expedient from military-political
point of view.
For the West, the resolution of the Armenian-Azeri conflict will be a
chance to launch a massive political-economic intervention into all
the South Caucasian countries, first of all, into Armenia, which has
dropped out of the regional integration because of being rope-tied
with Russia. Western analysts say that 3-5 years of massive
political-economic intervention will be enough for irreversibly
turning all the South Caucasian states in Euro-Atlantic direction.
That is, Russia will still have to leave the South Caucasus, but it
will do it gradually, will get some political-economic preferences
for that and, most importantly, will avoid serious cataclysms and
will save its face. Some Western experts believe that Russia's
involvement in serious internal political cataclysms in the South
Caucasus may seriously impede the region's Euro-Atlantic integration.
So, what we are witnessing, today, may well be a sophisticated
diplomatic game leading to a "conspiracy" between Russia and the West
for resolving the Armenian-Azeri conflict and for preserving the
present internal political status quo in both Armenia and Azerbaijan.
That's why the western co-chairs of the OSCE MG have repeatedly
hinted that it would be much easier for the Armenian and Azeri
authorities if they resolved the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict before the
elections in their countries. (Zerkalo)
Azerbaijan-Armenia. Nagorno-Karabakh problem
Zerkalo
says: "As regards the discussion of frozen conflicts at the UN
General Assembly, Azerbaijan seems not to be in a hurry. Unlike the
Georgian and Moldavian conflicts, the resolution of the
Armenian-Azeri conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh is in the center of the
international mediators' attention. In their public statements the
sides openly say that they may reach some agreements by the end of
this year or, perhaps, in early 2007. That's why, Baku should not
insist on the UN GA's discussing this problem before the current
stage is over.
Especially now that Azeri FM Elmar Mamedyarov has said that the new
proposals of the OSCE MG are acceptable for Azerbaijan, in principle.
Mamedyarov's words suggest that the co-chairs are waiting for
Armenia's official reaction to their proposals. If the sides agree,
the discussion at the UN GA will become unnecessary. If they don't.
Baku may demand it almost throughout next year - till Sept inclusive.
Besides, if the current round of the peace talks fails, Baku may
insist that the UN GA adopt very tough formulas against Armenia -
which is quite in line with Ilham Aliyev's recent statements about
possible revision of the settlement strategy.
Political expert Ilgar Mamedov comments on the last developments in
the Nagorno-Karabakh negotiating process in an interview to Echo:
"If the position of the Azeri leadership remains unchanged - i.e. the
position formulated and repeatedly expressed by the Azeri President:
Azerbaijan will never accept a scenario for alienating
Nagorno-Karabakh from its territory - all scenarios for resolving the
Armenian-Azerbaijan conflict are acceptable and possible. All those
package, phased, package-phased scenarios are just setting. The main
question is who Nagorno-Karabakh will belong to after final
resolution.
However, for many years already Baku has been insisting on phased
scenario, while Yerevan says the conflict can be resolved only in
package...
You may as well find some package agreement that will be acceptable
for Azerbaijan and quite unacceptable for Armenia. All this talk
about package or phased resolution is just a propaganda wave for
know-nothings. The opinion that for Azerbaijan any phased scenario is
better than any package one is nonsense. For example, a package
agreement may say that Nagorno-Karabakh is a sovereign territory.
Isn't it good for us?!
The Armenian FM says that Yerevan will discuss the question of
territories only after the status of Nagorno-Karabakh is specified?
It is just a new version of the well-known Armenian position. Still,
it seems a bit softer than the previous one. To wait for the status
to be specified is one thing and to insist that Nagorno-Karabakh
cannot be part of Azerbaijan is a quite another thing. It seems the
Armenians have slightly softened their position. They may be doing
this for getting dividends during their coming parliamentary
elections.
Recently the Armenian and Azeri FMs have been intensively meeting
even though earlier the Armenian FM refused to meet pointblank. Why
are they meeting so intensively?
I am inclined to think that the sides are being pressured into
meeting. However, there is also the factor of the next year's
parliamentary elections in Armenia. These are decisive elections, and
the Armenian leaders would like to get support and indulgence from
those who are pressuring and urging them on in the negotiating
process. This offers interesting possibilities to Azerbaijan. We'll
see how practicable they are.
By the way, much has recently been talked about the military budget
of Azerbaijan for 2007, which will be almost $1 billion and will be
bigger than the whole budget of Armenia. At the same time, they in
Yerevan and some local experts point to high corruption and other
factors that will prevent Baku from really changing the situation in
this direction...
Even if they "eat" half of the allocations, the constantly growing
remainder will create excellent conditions for Azerbaijan's military
superiority. And this superiority will become a political factor.
(Echo)
Armenian Defense Minister Serzh Sargsyan believes that his Azeri
counterpart also wants cease-fire. "He also wants the cease-fire
regime not to be broken," Sargsyan told journalists, while commenting
on his meeting with the Azeri DM. "Simply, we should realize that, if
there are tens of thousands of armed people on both sides, some of
them may shoot under certain circumstances. But we should see that
those shoots not be deliberate and cause no big incidents," Sargsyan
said. (Trend)
Excerpts from the interview of Azeri FM Elmar Mamedyarov to Day.Az:
"What can you say about the results of your meeting with the Armenian
FM in France? What do you expect from the forthcoming meeting in
Brussels?
The meeting in Paris is already history. As you already know, the
next meeting will take place in Brussels on Nov 14. On that day
Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia are to sign with the EU their New
European Policy action plans. We are going to meet before the signing
to discuss the new proposals and ideas put forward by the OSCE MG
co-chairs in Moscow.
Can you tell what those proposals are about?
It is early to do it yet. Shortly speaking, we touched on 1-2 moments
from the existing 8-9 elements and found it really hard to say if
there was any progress. During the last meeting in Moscow the
co-chairs presented some new ideas. We considered them and saw that
there might be some chance for us to work in this direction.
Presently, we are analyzing them and it seems we can work on them.
However, this is not a one-way process. We are also considering the
opinion of the opposite camp. As a result, we should decide in what
direction we should continue our work."
Nov 4 2006
"Russian authorities are doing all possible for not being loved, but
Americans do it better": Azeri press digest
Azerbaijan-Russia
Excerpts from the interview of political expert Arif Yunusov to
Day.Az:
"How big is Russia's influence on Azerbaijan, today?"
I think that, today, the Americans have a bit bigger influence in
Azerbaijan. True, in the first two years of Ilham Aliyev's rule,
their influence was much bigger, but in the last months Russia has
become much more active.
The local media were right when they said that the Oct 2005 arrest of
the pro-western economic development minister Farhad Aliyev - who was
seen by many as Azeri Yushchenko or Saakashvili - was, undoubtedly,
the work of Russia, more precisely, its special services. It was
Russia's biggest victory over the US in Azerbaijan in the last years.
Besides, there are pro-Russian men in Ilham Aliyev's team. Many of
them have businesses in Russia and can be used for pressure on
Azerbaijan. There are also Azeri emigrants. They also suffered from
the Russian-Georgian crisis, and, if there is a Russian-Azeri crisis,
their factor may play an even more serious role.
There is one more trump in Russia's hands: growing disappointment
with the US' policy in Azerbaijan. The anti-American moods are
getting so strong that even the Americans are beginning to notice it.
And what do our citizens say most often? What they say, in general,
is: "Russia never says that it wants to build democracy here. It
admits that it has its own interests in the region and wants to
restore its influence in Azerbaijan. Russia is not hypocritical. As
regards the Americans, they keep saying that the only thing they are
thinking about is to build democracy in Azerbaijan, but, in fact, the
only thing they are thinking about is how to get our oil and how to
use our territory against Muslims."
That's why Russia's authority in Azerbaijan is growing despite its
policy in the country. By their clumsy actions in the region, the
Russian authorities are doing all possible for not being loved, but
there are Americans who do it better. (Day.Az)
The Azeri office of the Russian Caucasian Institute of Democracy has
organized in Baku a roundtable "Energy Security of Azerbaijan: Pluses
and Minuses of Cooperation with Russia." Independent energy expert
Ilya Zaslavsky, oil and gas expert Georgy Nozadze and employee of the
Center for CIS Studies of Moscow State University Alexander Karavayev
took part in the event. Karavayev stressed the priority of politics
in the Russian-Azeri energy cooperation. He also spoke about the rise
in the Russian gas prices. He believes that "the gas weapon Russia is
trying to use is not giving it the expected results." Azerbaijan is
equal to Russia as it has its own energy resources and means of their
transportation. "I don't think that Russia can pressure Azerbaijan by
means of energy as Azerbaijan's energy security is beyond any
pressures and threats. Georgia and Armenia are a different story -
they seriously depend on Russia's energy," Karavayev said.
In his turn, the chairman of the Azeri National Public Committee on
Integration Ilgar Mamedov noted that Azerbaijan will gain from a new
rise in the Russian gas prices. "The point is that, after the first
rise, some partners, particularly, they in Armenia were strongly
displeased, and some local forces have already turned their eyes
westwards. If Russia does it again, Armenia will get even farther
from it, and this will serve our interests in the Nagorno-Karabakh
problem. In any case, new rise will not affect Azerbaijan's energy
security," Mamedov said. The director of the Center for Political
Innovation and Technologies Mubariz Ahmedoglu noted that if Russia
continues its energy blockade of Georgia, Azerbaijan will support its
neighbor and will partly cover Georgia's gas demand. "In terms of
energy security, it would be better for us if Russia more tightly
cooperated with Turkey."
Political expert Arif Yunusov agreed that the Azeri-Russian energy
cooperation is more dependent on politics than on economy. "It seems
to me that Russia has no clear energy policy. Yes, after the rise in
the gas prices, they in Russia were in some kind of euphoria over
Ukraine. However, the rise has also affected their strategic partners
- Belarus and Armenia - and this factor should make them anxious.
Russia has no clear energy policy, while we would like to clearly
know the energy priorities and goals of our neighbor, as energy
security depends on a complex of geo-political factors." (Echo)
Zerkalo says: "The strengthening of Russian-Armenian relations cannot
but influence the foreign policy of Azerbaijan. Until recently, there
has been a kind of status quo - a basic level - in Azeri-Russian
relations. But now that Moscow and Yerevan are coming increasingly
closer, Baku may turn its face towards the West, especially as all
this is happening before Ilham Aliyev's visit to the NATO
headquarters in Brussels.
It should also be noted that NATO Special Representative for the
South Caucasus Robert Simmons visited Baku quite recently. He openly
asked the Azeri leadership to clearly formulate their foreign policy
but received no answer. During the final press-conference he said
that in early Nov they in Brussels will give answers to all the
questions Azerbaijan is worried about.
If these answers are given and satisfy Baku, a new balance of forces
may take shape in the region in the near future - a pro-western
US-backed Azerbaijan-Georgia tandem that will oppose Russia-Armenia.
If this happens, Azerbaijan may change its present position
concerning the application of sanctions against Iran.
But there is one more scenario. In early Nov Ilham Aliyev is to go to
Moscow. Against the background of strengthening Russian-Armenian
relations, Vladimir Putin will have to offer Azerbaijan something
that would keep Baku away from NATO. This offer should not be
categorical and will hardly concern the Nagorno-Karabakh peace
process. Russia has proved that Armenia is closer to it; so, it will
hardly offer Azerbaijan anything profitable on Nagorno-Karabakh.
(Zerkalo)
Geo-politics
" They in Moscow and Washington think it possible that, in order to
dot all i's in their big geo-political game in the South Caucasus,
they will have to play for a government change during the coming
elections in Armenia and Azerbaijan. This is almost a foul play - a
play where they may lose much if not all - at least, for some time.
And this loss will endanger the geo-political interests of both the
West and Russia. So, the sides are trying to agree and to start
rivaling in "a more civilized manner." In fact, this second scenario
may result in agreements on the Armenian-Azeri conflict," says
Zerkalo.
"First, it will allow to avoid serious geo-political confrontation in
the region - which is good for both the West and Russia. They in the
Kremlin perfectly realize that, even with its huge oil export
incomes, Russia will not be able to confront the West and, first of
all, the US. If it tries to, it will have to become a fully "close
society," like it was in the Soviet times. This may result in an
"all-national default." And so, we can see that the Russian officials
are beginning to change their tone concerning Georgia.
Heavily dependent on Russian fuel, the West too would not like to use
"stick" against Russia.
Second, if Russia guarantees peace agreements in Nagorno-Karabakh, it
will gain, at least, temporary political influence in the region.
Geo-politically, Russia does not care much for who Nagorno-Karabakh
will belong to, but this will be a good chance for it to "show its
adherence" to the peaceful resolution of territorial-ethnic conflicts
in the CIS and, thereby, to gain wider room for maneuver when it is
time to settle the conflicts in Abkhazia or South Ossetia - the
conflicts Russia does care for.
Third, via Azerbaijan Russia will get something it has lost after its
crisis with Georgia - a stable land corridor to Armenia, Iran and
farther Turkey. Besides, Russia will be able to preserve its big
military contingent in Armenia (which is now in almost total
blockade) and to argue that it is expedient from military-political
point of view.
For the West, the resolution of the Armenian-Azeri conflict will be a
chance to launch a massive political-economic intervention into all
the South Caucasian countries, first of all, into Armenia, which has
dropped out of the regional integration because of being rope-tied
with Russia. Western analysts say that 3-5 years of massive
political-economic intervention will be enough for irreversibly
turning all the South Caucasian states in Euro-Atlantic direction.
That is, Russia will still have to leave the South Caucasus, but it
will do it gradually, will get some political-economic preferences
for that and, most importantly, will avoid serious cataclysms and
will save its face. Some Western experts believe that Russia's
involvement in serious internal political cataclysms in the South
Caucasus may seriously impede the region's Euro-Atlantic integration.
So, what we are witnessing, today, may well be a sophisticated
diplomatic game leading to a "conspiracy" between Russia and the West
for resolving the Armenian-Azeri conflict and for preserving the
present internal political status quo in both Armenia and Azerbaijan.
That's why the western co-chairs of the OSCE MG have repeatedly
hinted that it would be much easier for the Armenian and Azeri
authorities if they resolved the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict before the
elections in their countries. (Zerkalo)
Azerbaijan-Armenia. Nagorno-Karabakh problem
Zerkalo
says: "As regards the discussion of frozen conflicts at the UN
General Assembly, Azerbaijan seems not to be in a hurry. Unlike the
Georgian and Moldavian conflicts, the resolution of the
Armenian-Azeri conflict over Nagorno-Karabakh is in the center of the
international mediators' attention. In their public statements the
sides openly say that they may reach some agreements by the end of
this year or, perhaps, in early 2007. That's why, Baku should not
insist on the UN GA's discussing this problem before the current
stage is over.
Especially now that Azeri FM Elmar Mamedyarov has said that the new
proposals of the OSCE MG are acceptable for Azerbaijan, in principle.
Mamedyarov's words suggest that the co-chairs are waiting for
Armenia's official reaction to their proposals. If the sides agree,
the discussion at the UN GA will become unnecessary. If they don't.
Baku may demand it almost throughout next year - till Sept inclusive.
Besides, if the current round of the peace talks fails, Baku may
insist that the UN GA adopt very tough formulas against Armenia -
which is quite in line with Ilham Aliyev's recent statements about
possible revision of the settlement strategy.
Political expert Ilgar Mamedov comments on the last developments in
the Nagorno-Karabakh negotiating process in an interview to Echo:
"If the position of the Azeri leadership remains unchanged - i.e. the
position formulated and repeatedly expressed by the Azeri President:
Azerbaijan will never accept a scenario for alienating
Nagorno-Karabakh from its territory - all scenarios for resolving the
Armenian-Azerbaijan conflict are acceptable and possible. All those
package, phased, package-phased scenarios are just setting. The main
question is who Nagorno-Karabakh will belong to after final
resolution.
However, for many years already Baku has been insisting on phased
scenario, while Yerevan says the conflict can be resolved only in
package...
You may as well find some package agreement that will be acceptable
for Azerbaijan and quite unacceptable for Armenia. All this talk
about package or phased resolution is just a propaganda wave for
know-nothings. The opinion that for Azerbaijan any phased scenario is
better than any package one is nonsense. For example, a package
agreement may say that Nagorno-Karabakh is a sovereign territory.
Isn't it good for us?!
The Armenian FM says that Yerevan will discuss the question of
territories only after the status of Nagorno-Karabakh is specified?
It is just a new version of the well-known Armenian position. Still,
it seems a bit softer than the previous one. To wait for the status
to be specified is one thing and to insist that Nagorno-Karabakh
cannot be part of Azerbaijan is a quite another thing. It seems the
Armenians have slightly softened their position. They may be doing
this for getting dividends during their coming parliamentary
elections.
Recently the Armenian and Azeri FMs have been intensively meeting
even though earlier the Armenian FM refused to meet pointblank. Why
are they meeting so intensively?
I am inclined to think that the sides are being pressured into
meeting. However, there is also the factor of the next year's
parliamentary elections in Armenia. These are decisive elections, and
the Armenian leaders would like to get support and indulgence from
those who are pressuring and urging them on in the negotiating
process. This offers interesting possibilities to Azerbaijan. We'll
see how practicable they are.
By the way, much has recently been talked about the military budget
of Azerbaijan for 2007, which will be almost $1 billion and will be
bigger than the whole budget of Armenia. At the same time, they in
Yerevan and some local experts point to high corruption and other
factors that will prevent Baku from really changing the situation in
this direction...
Even if they "eat" half of the allocations, the constantly growing
remainder will create excellent conditions for Azerbaijan's military
superiority. And this superiority will become a political factor.
(Echo)
Armenian Defense Minister Serzh Sargsyan believes that his Azeri
counterpart also wants cease-fire. "He also wants the cease-fire
regime not to be broken," Sargsyan told journalists, while commenting
on his meeting with the Azeri DM. "Simply, we should realize that, if
there are tens of thousands of armed people on both sides, some of
them may shoot under certain circumstances. But we should see that
those shoots not be deliberate and cause no big incidents," Sargsyan
said. (Trend)
Excerpts from the interview of Azeri FM Elmar Mamedyarov to Day.Az:
"What can you say about the results of your meeting with the Armenian
FM in France? What do you expect from the forthcoming meeting in
Brussels?
The meeting in Paris is already history. As you already know, the
next meeting will take place in Brussels on Nov 14. On that day
Azerbaijan, Georgia and Armenia are to sign with the EU their New
European Policy action plans. We are going to meet before the signing
to discuss the new proposals and ideas put forward by the OSCE MG
co-chairs in Moscow.
Can you tell what those proposals are about?
It is early to do it yet. Shortly speaking, we touched on 1-2 moments
from the existing 8-9 elements and found it really hard to say if
there was any progress. During the last meeting in Moscow the
co-chairs presented some new ideas. We considered them and saw that
there might be some chance for us to work in this direction.
Presently, we are analyzing them and it seems we can work on them.
However, this is not a one-way process. We are also considering the
opinion of the opposite camp. As a result, we should decide in what
direction we should continue our work."